NXT NWS Debate - Most Important Decade for Video Gaming

[Deexter Jorgan]

I'll concede the Game & Watch to you, as I wasn't familiar with it's design. Let's not kid ourselves, other than the basic design it had to technological impact on the DS.

I'm not going to sit here and respond to your insults Deej, according to you I'm an Idiot who talks out his ass, yet you didn't bother to read through my Opening post, or any of the other ten posts scattered with facts. It's not my job to reiterate the facts over and over again. If you want to debate with me go back and challenge my original post.

The asthetical design was the main impact, do you think Nintendo would have challenged us with the dual screen DS if it wasn't for it's predecessor, yes it's more advance graphically but the basic concept draws its look and formula from the game and watch.

you attempted to refut my claims by claiming that the 90's are better but you have yet to actually provide full evidence to how and why?.

I'm sorry if i hurt your feelings but in the end without merit you cannot give claim to the 90's as a dominent decade.

Numbers and I have proved that the 80's is far superior due to the fact that everything you hold dear today is spawned from the ideas of the 80's.

The two biggest franchises in gaming history where spawned from that decade (Legend Of Zelda and Mario).

you claim to refut everything myself and numbers have stated but hold no hard evidence as to why,

Why? is the 90's better apart from a graphical perspective, He'll 32 and 64 bit consoles actually came through in the 1980's, look up the turbofx-cd, look up the sega genesis, all came together from that decade, it doesn't matter if it was the later part of the 80's the decade still lays claim to innovation, without it there would be no home gaming systems.

without the console crash of the 80's there would be no dominance by nintendo, no competition by sega, there would be no innovations in gaming creation without the building blocks that the 80's provided for gamers such as you and me.

Give me hard facts thats all i ask for SSC.

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

No, Numbers left the thread because his ass was handed to him. At least he responded to people's main points and tried to make an interesting debate. You just come in and make baseless insults without actually refuting most peoples facts. Go back to the first few pages of the thread and actually read a little because you are making a fool of yourself.

have you actually read the entire thread?

If you looked at the entire thread you would see that i backed my claims up with evidence, and i refuted every claim that was made.

Unlike you BigSexy, you instead attempted to make numbers look foolish because he got wrong the year sonic was made, he still made a valid arguement pertaining to the fact that Sega and Nintendo's rivalry started in the 80's.

So why don't you take a look at the whole perspective of this thread, look at every angle everyone has produced, he'll google everything i has just stated, every mention of the 80's and you will find that they are based on fact, not baseless fiction.

the fact is you won't, instead of putting together an inttelligent arguement you would rather argue that i hurt SSC's feelings.

Good job btw.

 

[Big Sexy]

have you actually read the entire thread?

If you looked at the entire thread you would see that i backed my claims up with evidence, and i refuted every claim that was made.

Unlike you BigSexy, you instead attempted to make numbers look foolish because he got wrong the year sonic was made, he still made a valid arguement pertaining to the fact that Sega and Nintendo's rivalry started in the 80's.

So why don't you take a look at the whole perspective of this thread, look at every angle everyone has produced, he'll google everything i has just stated, every mention of the 80's and you will find that they are based on fact, not baseless fiction.

the fact is you won't, instead of putting together an inttelligent arguement you would rather argue that i hurt SSC's feelings.

Good job btw.

I didn't try to make Numbers look foolish, I did make Numbers look foolish and it wasn't just for getting the game dates wrong. I have also read the entire thread and most of your posts consist of just saying "Such and such had origins in the 80's so that makes it the most important decade." Everything has to start somewhere so while that argument is good for some of the debate you have to do better then that to win people over. I've made plenty of intelligent arguments now go refute them instead of taking the bitch way out.

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

I didn't try to make Numbers look foolish, I did make Numbers look foolish and it wasn't just for getting the game dates wrong. I have also read the entire thread and most of your posts consist of just saying "Such and such had origins in the 80's so that makes it the most important decade." Everything has to start somewhere so while that argument is good for some of the debate you have to do better then that to win people over.

How does that not make 80's the decade of decodence?, One of the biggest gaming giants in the world has come from the 80's and you're saying that it doesn't matter?.

It all started from here, the 80's is like the roots to all these console tree's without those roots how the hell is the tree going to stay in place?.

And it all didn't start in the 80's it started way before, but the 80's became the rebirth of the gaming industry on the brink of exstinction, like the phoenix rising from the ashes, two of the biggest influences in the console market did battle, brands where established, names where made.

Here's on more for you

The 80's braught force the developers right to royalties from their games, prior to that companies such as Atari where not allowing there game designers to even state their real names in interviews and where being paid penuts.

after the crash all that changed, Nintendo didn't just change the console market, they changed the way games where made in general, you claim to know so much but yet you don't understand what impact this decacde had on the gaming industry.

It's not just about console's or starting point's its about the evolution of the whole industry, as IC pointed out for a brief moment, as Jose gave in detail as I also touched on, the 80's was more than the 90's and 00's because it changed the way the industry was managed, and began a step in gaming evolution that till this day still keeps striving from strength to strength, if you read this entire thread you would have understood my arguements more clearly.

The 80's wins hands down!

 

[DirtyJosé]

There was the transition into three dimensional gaming, we got out first look at the first person shooter as well as real time strategy games. We even got our first celebrity appearance in a videogame.

Mark Hamill in Wing Commander 3

Spoiler

It’s common to see actors lend their voices to video games, it actually happens quite frequently, but this was the very first example; not just his voice, but actual on screen acting in the videogame. This laid the ground work for such stars as Samuel L. Jackson to earn a little extra cash on the side for games like Grand Theft Auto, which just so happened to make its appearance on the Playstation consol in the 90’s.

These are all either advances made for or by the American gaming market, a market that would not have been as healthy, or even alive, during the 90's had it not been for Nintendo's arrival in 1985. Nintendo's innovation not only in quality of game content but in its approach to building consoles, courting the third party development scene, and rebuilding confidence in the entire concept of home console video gaming in America ensured that the 90's could be a time of technological advancement. Prior to Nintendo's truly industry changing strategies, such advancement never occurred because there was no "five year cycle", and companies continued to churn out console after console with minimal update and little time for developers and engineers to perfect and improve upon coding and manufacturing techniques, respectively.

With the introduction of the Super NES and the Sega Genesis at the beginning of the 90’s, as well as the introduction to two of the most influential gaming systems ever in the Playstation and the Nintendo 64 it’s clear that the 90’s had a powerful influence on current gaming culture. That’s the ground work for the Wii and the Paystation 3, that’s two of the big three with major 90’s roots.

Without Nintendo pulling the John Cena and saving the day in the 80's:

-Sega would have had a much much more difficult time in getting the Genesis released in America, if it wasn't flat out impossible for them to do so. Remember the Genesis didn't hit here until '89, well after Nintendo had demonstrated that the American market could be salvaged and made profitable again.

-Sony, already wishy washy with its feelings on the video game industry, would likely have balked at Nintendo's SNES/CD-ROM project. Nintendo had tried disk ad-ons before in Japan, but it was a bit of a flop. Discussion about the partnership, which was part of the planning of the SNES, didn't take place until '86, after Nintendo had made its huge splash on American shores.

With those systems we got some of the most innovative games of our time. Games like Mortal Kombat could finally be played at home, which in turn led to the downfall of the arcade. Mario and Star Fox 64 utilized three dimensional graphics like none before, and Golden Eye and Perfect Dark revolutionized the first person shooter, and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. So many great games got their start in the 90’s. We have Sonic, Perfect Dark, Resident evil, DDR, Ocorina of Time, Tomb Raider and the list just goes on and on.

The budget required to make these later games are mind boggling. No American company was willing to put that kind of money into a video game, at least not until Nintendo had already rebuilt the American home console market. Do you think as many houses would have had the SNES or Genesis required to play these games if it wasn't for the NES's arrival in '85? If it wasn't for Nintendo brilliant strategy throughout the 80's, which inspired others like NEC and Sega to try their hand at the American home console market, there would not have been the interest in investing in the research and development of the technologies essential to home console gaming in the 90's and 00's.

We also saw the Gameboy take flight, and for the first time you could play video games on the go, which in turn led to the cell phone video games. I’m talking to you original Nokia with Snake, the first phone game of its kind, a true classic time killer, which led to the ability to download game like Tetris onto your phone, and I don’t have to tell you where that technology has taken you today.

Snake: A game created in the 70's.

Tetris: A game created in the 80's.

GameBoy: Handheld gaming devices were not uncommon before the GameBoy, and had it not been for the good reputation and exposure Nintendo developed with the NES's introduction to American consumers and retailers, many would have passed at picking up the expensive GameBoy. Again, until Nintendo's arrival in '85, Americans were done with video gaming consoles.

There was also the transition from cartridges to compact discs, which helped to advance three dimensional gaming even further, and of course that’s the only form you see today, other than the Gameboy cartridge which is still running strong.

And through each evolution of game media, every company has emulated the security protocols innovated by Nintendo in the 80's with the development of the Famicon/NES. This strategy allows each console maker to control what games are made for it's systems, preventing the out of control third party market that lead to the market crash in '83.

The 90’s took gaming everywhere and it came in all forms, computers, cell phones, at home consoles. Video games became so important in the 90’s that they influence was felt all over pop culture as well. So with so much innovation in all forms of gaming it seems pretty clear that the 90’s had by far the greatest influence and was easily the most important era of all time.

The "wild 90's" of gaming would not have been possible without the lessons learned from both the crash of the market in 83' and Nintendo's arrival and subsequent revival of the American market. Home consoles were a dead product until the NES. Cell phone games of the 90's (70's, really) aren't even close to the iconic gaming creations of the 80's, including Pac-Man and Mario. And computer gaming never reached the cultural saturation that Nintendo enjoyed until the advent of the MMORPG and modern (00's) online gaming.

The 80's made gaming as we know it today.

 

[BooCocky]

You know looking back at the video game industry you can see trends and developments. In this decade video games are for everyone. People of all ages can play video games. You really couldn't imagine that is past decades. Nowadays there is a video game for everyone. It wasn't like that in the 80's and 90's.

Video games in the 80's were made for kids. Adults weren't interested in games like Mario. nor were they interested in playing the nintendo. The 90's did adapt, but to the wrong crowd. In the 90's video games were made for the loners. The people who would lock themselves in a room away from the wolrd and play video games. They'd have no human interaction.

That isn't the case today with online play. You can interact with people from all over the world. You can talk through headsets, you can play yor friends, you can do pretty much anything.

Video games today are for everyone. They have games for all ages. They have learning games for children, they have games based off of kids movies for the kids. They got games that are meant for teenagers and adults.

In the 80's could you imagine something like that? Hell no. Parents hated video games. I know mine did. In the 90's nothing improved. So most parents still hated games because kids weren't getting exercise. You can even have a workout through a video game thanks to Wii Fit. If 2000-2009 isn't the best decade in sports, I have no idea what decade is. You can simply do it all now. You weren't capable of that before 2000.

 

[DirtyJosé]

You know looking back at the video game industry you can see trends and developments. In this decade video games are for everyone. People of all ages can play video games. You really couldn't imagine that is past decades. Nowadays there is a video game for everyone. It wasn't like that in the 80's and 90's.

Video games in the 80's were made for kids. Adults weren't interested in games like Mario. nor were they interested in playing the nintendo. The 90's did adapt, but to the wrong crowd. In the 90's video games were made for the loners. The people who would lock themselves in a room away from the wolrd and play video games. They'd have no human interaction.

That isn't the case today with online play. You can interact with people from all over the world. You can talk through headsets, you can play yor friends, you can do pretty much anything.

Video games today are for everyone. They have games for all ages. They have learning games for children, they have games based off of kids movies for the kids. They got games that are meant for teenagers and adults.

In the 80's could you imagine something like that? Hell no. Parents hated video games. I know mine did. In the 90's nothing improved. So most parents still hated games because kids weren't getting exercise. You can even have a workout through a video game thanks to Wii Fit. If 2000-2009 isn't the best decade in sports, I have no idea what decade is. You can simply do it all now. You weren't capable of that before 2000.

Psst...Games appealed to adults far before 2000. And if it seems like there are more adult gamers now, it's because they are children of the 80's, and grew up with an NES. Your argument is that the 00's are the most important decade because they have more systems, more games, and better features. That would certainly be a decent argument for "which decade is the better decade for gaming", but this debate is about the "most important", and what real change has there been in gaming in this decade? What moments of importance strike out at you from this decade as being worthy of making it the most important decade?

Motion control? Pioneered in the 80's. Online capabilities? Computers have been doing it for years. Built-in media players as part of the selling point? Playstation and Saturn both featured CD Playback capabilities. I can at least understand the argument in favor of the 90's (even though it's wrong), but the 00's are far from the most important decade for video gaming.

So the 00's do things better from a technological stand point; will you be able to say the same thing ten years from now? Or ten years after? Meanwhile, the events of the 80's, and their repercussions, mean far more to the history of video gaming than anything the 00's have contributed.

 

[Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra]

I'm not going to qoute Deej, but there are a few things I want to address here. One is I never said I was an old school gamer. Two is I'm not ignorant, not in the least bit, and your petty attempts at insulting me have been noted, and three is you saying I'm embarrassing myself by repeating myself when infact... you know what I'll leave that for another time and place.

On to your stance on the subject. The stance you have taken is the 80's are the most important decade because it came first. That's the meat of your arguement and that is what I'll address. Stop word forting(credit to Coco) your posts when that is really the only thing you're saying.

Would you like to know why being the first isn't the most important? It's because your arguement is stating that because it is first everything had to follow it so that makes it more important. Yet you admit that gaming didn't start in the 80's at all, it was the 70's. So that would prove your stance a faulty one backed with nothing. To save myself from embarrassing myself any furter by telling you why my stance is the correct one I'll leave my post at this.

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

I'm not going to qoute Deej, but there are a few things I want to address here. One is I never said I was an old school gamer. Two is I'm not ignorant, not in the least bit, and your petty attempts at insulting me have been noted, and three is you saying I'm embarrassing myself by repeating myself when infact... you know what I'll leave that for another time and place.

You said you where "an old school kind of guy", which suggest's that you understand the basic concept of what old school gaming was all about, ah well, ignorance is bliss.

On to your stance on the subject. The stance you have taken is the 80's are the most important decade because it came first. That's the meat of your arguement and that is what I'll address. Stop word forting(credit to Coco) your posts when that is really the only thing you're saying.

It's not a suggestion, it's pure fact, as Jose has suggested and number's has previously suggested in this thread without Nintendo saving the day and bringing faith back into the console we would not have enjoyed the new gaming systems we have today, all the advancement's made in the industry was because of this one point in gamin history.

That my friend is pure fact, weather you like it or not.

Would you like to know why being the first isn't the most important?

Please enlighten me...

It's because your arguement is stating that because it is first everything had to follow it so that makes it more important. Yet you admit that gaming didn't start in the 80's at all, it was the 70's. So that would prove your stance a faulty one backed with nothing. To save myself from embarrassing myself any furter by telling you why my stance is the correct one I'll leave my post at this.

Wrong... If you read my previous post's Nintendo wasn't the first company to make the leap to gaming, it wasn't the first company that made the leap into online gaming either.

Companies like Atari, Coleco, Matel, and Bandai first introduced the gaming concept to the general public.

Here's abit of history for you, Nintendo braught the idea of an 8bit home console to Atari, they would manufacture the units and Nintendo would add it's name to them, Atari didn't want that, so both companies took a leap of faith on their own, Atari later left the console market and Nintendo still remains as the leader of gaiming.

Simple Fact.

I knew where he was coming from originally but then he brought up the fact that the Master System was the first of its kind and that statement was really irrelevant to what was being talked about. I also know the "war" is Nintendo vs Sega but again I don't consider that war to be anything of note until the 90's. In the 80's Nintendo dominated in North American and Japan and they were about equal in Europe. I'd still call that domination.

Actually he's right, the original sega master system was an innovative product, let me explain why

Firstly the master systems technology was far superior to the NES displaying more pixelated graphics, is this important?, yes it is because without it neither company would have looked at ways to provide a far superior gaming experience, but that young man is not the only reason why the system was innovative

if you look closely the console not only accepted cartridges, it accepted something different, a medium called sega card games, these games where cheaper in production costs, the downside to using this medium where the storage space.

This console was actually the first third generation console having previous modules made including the SGC-100, so your claims are refuted.

nice try though.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

Give me hard facts thats all i ask for SSC.

As I said If you want to debate the facts go and debate me on my opening post, I'm not going to reply to little cut up pieces of what I've said.

I'm also not going to respond to insults, and I'm not playing this classless game with you. You want to argue the facts, I've presented them, it's not my job to reiterate them because you don't want to argue with the many facts that I presented in my opening post as well as many of my following posts. Yet you choose to ignore them, while calling me an idiot, quite laughable. I'm still willing to debate you, but go argue my facts, not a simple quote of me saying the 90's are better. Also, try using spell check Deej, as it's almost unbearable trying to read through your posts that lack many basic spelling and punctuation fundamentals.

the fact is you won't, instead of putting together an inttelligent arguement you would rather argue that i hurt SSC's feelings.

What are you talking about Deej? What the hell is an “Inttelligent Argeument”, this is irony at its best. Lets learn how to spell intelligent before accusing others of not having any.

These are all either advances made for or by the American gaming market, a market that would not have been as healthy, or even alive, during the 90's had it not been for Nintendo's arrival in 1985. Nintendo's innovation not only in quality of game content but in its approach to building consoles, courting the third party development scene, and rebuilding confidence in the entire concept of home console video gaming in America ensured that the 90's could be a time of technological advancement. Prior to Nintendo's truly industry changing strategies, such advancement never occurred because there was no "five year cycle", and companies continued to churn out console after console with minimal update and little time for developers and engineers to perfect and improve upon coding and manufacturing techniques, respectively.

I'm not denying that the 80's put some bricks in place, and there is no denying that the Nintedo was really the first big time at home console, but let’s not pretend that the 80’s didn’t take full advantage of the 70’s and the 60’s as well. Video games where around long before the 80’s. First generation home consoles where released in the 70’s, so the 80’s had a blue print, just like the 90’s did. The crash in the 80’s almost killed the videogame industry, while obviously it turned itself around, we still have to take into account that the 80’s almost killed the videogame industry.

Without Nintendo pulling the John Cena and saving the day in the 80's:

Sure they pulled through with the Super Cena, but they created the problem too, it was their responsibility to fix it. Fixing a problem that was created by the 80’s is simply the only thing they could do without letting the entire videogme market fall on their faces. It wasn’t saving the day, they had no choice but to fix the problem.

-Sega would have had a much much more difficult time in getting the Genesis released in America, if it wasn't flat out impossible for them to do so. Remember the Genesis didn't hit here until '89, well after Nintendo had demonstrated that the American market could be salvaged and made profitable again.

While I’m well aware that the end of the 80’s are responsible for the creation of the Genesis system, as you pointed out it wasn’t released in America until almost the end or 89’, thus letting the rivalry begin in the 90’s. The 80’s may have jump started the rivalry, but it didn’t become a war until the 90’s.

-Sony, already wishy washy with its feelings on the video game industry, would likely have balked at Nintendo's SNES/CD-ROM project. Nintendo had tried disk ad-ons before in Japan, but it was a bit of a flop. Discussion about the partnership, which was part of the planning of the SNES, didn't take place until '86, after Nintendo had made its huge splash on American shores.

I’m not really sure what the point is here, all I’m getting out of this is a failure in the 80’s that was turned to a success in the 90’s.

The budget required to make these later games are mind boggling. No American company was willing to put that kind of money into a video game, at least not until Nintendo had already rebuilt the American home console market. Do you think as many houses would have had the SNES or Genesis required to play these games if it wasn't for the NES's arrival in '85? If it wasn't for Nintendo brilliant strategy throughout the 80's, which inspired others like NEC and Sega to try their hand at the American home console market, there would not have been the interest in investing in the research and development of the technologies essential to home console gaming in the 90's and 00's.

The 80’s big claim to fame is the Nintendo home console, I’m not arguing its importance, as it was a very important, if not the most important system to gaming, but it’s just one system. The 90’s have many systems that became far more famous than the Nintendo. Let’s also not forget that the Nintendo was not the first at home console, in fact the Nintendo, your generations biggest claim to fame was a third generation system, so just like the 90’s the 80’s had a lot to work with, though they didn’t progress videogames along nearly as much as the 90’s did, as you’ve mentioned before, the 80’s almost destroyed the video game world, granted the dug out of that hole, but it still set the 80’s back as a gaming generation.

Snake: A game created in the 70's.

Tetris: A game created in the 80's.

Not arguing when the games where created, simply saying that this was the first case of videogames being available on cell phones.

GameBoy: Handheld gaming devices were not uncommon before the GameBoy, and had it not been for the good reputation and exposure Nintendo developed with the NES's introduction to American consumers and retailers, many would have passed at picking up the expensive GameBoy. Again, until Nintendo's arrival in '85, Americans were done with video gaming consoles.

Americans where done with gaming because of the epic failure credited to your generation, the 80’s may have made amends for the problems they created, but again, the 80’s created the problem and fixed it, costing them precious time to further advance gaming as a whole.
As far as hand held games, well they where around before the 80’s, yes the gameboy was a first of its kind, but it was at the very end of the eighties, and while I give credit for the creation of the Gameboy it was made famous in the 90’s.

And through each evolution of game media, every company has emulated the security protocols innovated by Nintendo in the 80's with the development of the Famicon/NES. This strategy allows each console maker to control what games are made for it's systems, preventing the out of control third party market that lead to the market crash in '83.

This is again a win/lose situation for our generation, while this is a big part of gaming today, your generation made the mistake, unknowingly of course, but a mistake none the less. Even though the 80’s fixed the problem it still cost the almost three years that could have been used for advancing games, but instead was spent digging themselves out of a massive hole.

The "wild 90's" of gaming would not have been possible without the lessons learned from both the crash of the market in 83' and Nintendo's arrival and subsequent revival of the American market. Home consoles were a dead product until the NES. Cell phone games of the 90's (70's, really) aren't even close to the iconic gaming creations of the 80's, including Pac-Man and Mario. And computer gaming never reached the cultural saturation that Nintendo enjoyed until the advent of the MMORPG and modern (00's) online gaming.

The 80's made gaming as we know it today.

Pac man is a great example of a game developed in the 70’s and released in the early 80’s, practically right along the lines of the Genesis and the Gameboy, both needed multiple generations, and though it was released in the 80’s, creation and production of Pac Man began in the 70’s.
The 80’s almost destroyed gaming forever, and spent years fixing the problem, time that could have been spent advancing games and systems further, instead these advancements where left for the 90’s because of that problem. And while there is no arguing the importance of the third generation system known as the Nintendo, it’s a third generation system and the bricks where being laid out in the 70’s and 60’s as well. The 80’s may have lit the fuse, but the rocket didn’t launch until the 90’s.

 

[Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra]

Everyone's stance in a nutshell. 80's say the that their decade is more important because it was the beginning of modern gaming. 90's say their decade is the most important because of the new technology and new ways of gaming they introduced. A few things I'd like to ask everyone, would you still be passionate about gaming if you were still playing Super Mario or GoldenEye today? I'd bet no. In gaming and technology what you need is improvement, that's what the 00's did the best. Improve everything, without the improvement people would get bored of 2D games and decent(at best) graphics in the 3D games. Those decades are only getting love because of the nostalgia factor, everyone is remembering their childhood and not thinking about if they would still care to play the game(HHH pun intended) if not for the betterment of the games.

 

[DirtyJosé]

I'm not denying that the 80's put some bricks in place, and there is no denying that the Nintedo was really the first big time at home console, but let’s not pretend that the 80’s didn’t take full advantage of the 70’s and the 60’s as well. Video games where around long before the 80’s. First generation home consoles where released in the 70’s, so the 80’s had a blue print, just like the 90’s did. The crash in the 80’s almost killed the videogame industry, while obviously it turned itself around, we still have to take into account that the 80’s almost killed the videogame industry.

But you know as well as I do that this isn't about what came first. We'd all be talking Pong consoles and such. IC25 seemed to realize this too, thus why these three specific decades were chosen as the topics. The importance of the 80's isn't simply that "it came first" or got big first, but that the crash and subsequent recovery dramatically changed the direction of the industry from top to bottom, from how things were marketed, and to whom, to how games and consoles were designed.

Sure they pulled through with the Super Cena, but they created the problem too, it was their responsibility to fix it. Fixing a problem that was created by the 80’s is simply the only thing they could do without letting the entire videogme market fall on their faces. It wasn’t saving the day, they had no choice but to fix the problem.

But if not for Nintendo's innovations, there would have been no one to fix it. Most American game development and publishing companies had folded over by this point. Nintendo, developing it's approach to the American market, first tried to enter into partnership with Atari, hoping to benefit from it's still somewhat good name, and even they wanted nothing to do with gaming at that point.

Also, there was no consumer demand for this stuff anymore, which is why most companies didn't care. Toy stores no longer viewed them as a product that would sell, especially for their high costs, and had been burned by merchandise they could not return to the publishers and manufacturers, and were forced to sell off for a loss. Customers just didn't trust the stuff anymore.

While I’m well aware that the end of the 80’s are responsible for the creation of the Genesis system, as you pointed out it wasn’t released in America until almost the end or 89’, thus letting the rivalry begin in the 90’s. The 80’s may have jump started the rivalry, but it didn’t become a war until the 90’s.

Both NEC and Sega only eyed the American Market after Nintendo had already saved it, that was the point I was going for. Sega and NEC weren't prepared to salvage American home console gaming as Nintendo was. The point isn't about why the Genesis/Mega Drive was made, but in why the it, and the Master System before it, even made it to our shores.

I’m not really sure what the point is here, all I’m getting out of this is a failure in the 80’s that was turned to a success in the 90’s.

Negotiations began as early as '86 for CD technology to be incorporated into what became the SNES. At the time, Nintendo still viewed disc ad-ons as a neat addition, but underestimated their potential impact on gaming, while Sony, who had supplied Nintendo with chips for years, still had doubts about committing to home console gaming without piggybacking off of Nintendo. Had Nintendo not succeeded in reviving the American market, Sony would not have set in motion the project that became the PlayStation.

The 80’s big claim to fame is the Nintendo home console, I’m not arguing its importance, as it was a very important, if not the most important system to gaming, but it’s just one system. The 90’s have many systems that became far more famous than the Nintendo. Let’s also not forget that the Nintendo was not the first at home console, in fact the Nintendo, your generations biggest claim to fame was a third generation system, so just like the 90’s the 80’s had a lot to work with, though they didn’t progress videogames along nearly as much as the 90’s did, as you’ve mentioned before, the 80’s almost destroyed the video game world, granted the dug out of that hole, but it still set the 80’s back as a gaming generation.

Let me put it this way: The Wii and the GameCube (00's product) were not nearly as reliant on the success of the N64 (90's product) before it as the SNES (other 90's product) was reliant on the breakaway success of the NES. If not for Sega and NEC entering the American market themselves after adopting Nintendo's methods, Nintendo would not have hurried to have the SNES out by 1990. They only felt pressure to introduce the product after the Genesis had been released to America. There could have been no GameCube console, and a Wii console would have still been possible and as marketable, simply because of the Nintendo name. A name that became synonymous with modern gaming in 80's.

Not arguing when the games where created, simply saying that this was the first case of videogames being available on cell phones.

I'll let this slide, amigo.

Americans where done with gaming because of the epic failure credited to your generation, the 80’s may have made amends for the problems they created, but again, the 80’s created the problem and fixed it, costing them precious time to further advance gaming as a whole.
As far as hand held games, well they where around before the 80’s, yes the gameboy was a first of its kind, but it was at the very end of the eighties, and while I give credit for the creation of the Gameboy it was made famous in the 90’s.

This is again a win/lose situation for our generation, while this is a big part of gaming today, your generation made the mistake, unknowingly of course, but a mistake none the less. Even though the 80’s fixed the problem it still cost the almost three years that could have been used for advancing games, but instead was spent digging themselves out of a massive hole.

Pac man is a great example of a game developed in the 70’s and released in the early 80’s, practically right along the lines of the Genesis and the Gameboy, both needed multiple generations, and though it was released in the 80’s, creation and production of Pac Man began in the 70’s.
The 80’s almost destroyed gaming forever, and spent years fixing the problem, time that could have been spent advancing games and systems further, instead these advancements where left for the 90’s because of that problem. And while there is no arguing the importance of the third generation system known as the Nintendo, it’s a third generation system and the bricks where being laid out in the 70’s and 60’s as well. The 80’s may have lit the fuse, but the rocket didn’t launch until the 90’s.

The thing is, until the crash, and the shift in power to Japanese companies, American companies were doing even worse with moving things along. As far as handhelds go, the GameBoy success is hardwired to the fate of the NES in American, without a doubt. And this is about the importance of a generation, and I feel that having more important events that reach us even now, 30 years later, is a better qualification than having better technology or popularity. Aside from a lawsuit against Sega which was successful, though ultimately pointless, the standards that Nintendo introduced have shaped and influenced the policies of every major console manufacturer in the world today. It's not really time wasted if it was worth it in the end. Time wasted would be the death of Sega in the home console market; a stark reminder of how important the lessons of the 80's are.

 

[a0161613]

I have to say I think Deej and D'Jose are doing a superb job working with us here.

And since I was so rudely and prematurely dismissed from this, I feel I should state that in no form do I concede that any of the points here, have dented our arguement in the slightest. I see no comeback from that show in anywhere near as much details or vigour that the 90's or 00's deserve this.

But I have to pick at one or two points here that really aggravate me.

Everyone's stance in a nutshell. 80's say the that their decade is more important because it was the beginning of modern gaming.

So much more than that and I do think a lot of our points have been missed.

90's say their decade is the most important because of the new technology and new ways of gaming they introduced. A few things I'd like to ask everyone, would you still be passionate about gaming if you were still playing Super Mario or GoldenEye today?

Erm, do you not know that Goldeneye is being remade for the Wii? And do you consider that the monumentally superb template set by Super Mario 64 has been replicated in every 3D Mario game onwards.

Old-skool, whether it be 80's or 90's is a big seller. No matter how lazy it seems for a developer to rehash an ten or twenty year old concept with added HD-sparkly bells and whistles. And that takes up a lot of room for the noughties. Lazy developers retreading old franchises because it makes money and they would often prefer to do that or release their annual franchises (FFIA, Madden, Call of Duty even) with the newest gimmick that technology can allow.

 

[Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra]

I have to say I think Deej and D'Jose are doing a superb job working with us here.

By insulting everyone? Not Jose, but your partner.

And since I was so rudely and prematurely dismissed from this, I feel I should state that in no form do I concede that any of the points here, have dented our arguement in the slightest. I see no comeback from that show in anywhere near as much details or vigour that the 90's or 00's deserve this.

I didn't do it, so check before you make assumptions like you did in another thread.

But I have to pick at one or two points here that really aggravate me.

I'm waiting.....

So much more than that and I do think a lot of our points have been missed.

Like the video game crash that nearly killed the industry?

Erm, do you not know that Goldeneye is being remade for the Wii?

So it's being made into a better game. Improvement.

And do you consider that the monumentally superb template set by Super Mario 64 has been replicated in every 3D Mario game onwards.

And made better. Aren't you supposed to be making a case for the 80's though?

Not to mention New Super Mario Bros, which was a remake of a god-knows-how-old Mario game.

Made better again, but even if there was no Mario it would just be some other character being made into a better game.

Old-skool, whether it be 80's or 90's is a big seller. No matter how lazy it seems for a developer to rehash an ten or twenty year old concept with added HD-sparkly bells and whistles. And that takes up a lot of room for the noughties. Lazy developers retreading old franchises because it makes money and they would often prefer to do that or release their annual franchises (FFIA, Madden, Call of Duty even) with the newest gimmick that technology can allow.

So the big names are Mario, Sonic, and what Pac Man? Should I list the big names my decade has introduced? About ten fold more than the other decades. Like I said, Mario and Sonic are still around because of nostalia, and of two companies that developed those characters one is out of business and the other isn't on the same level as Sony or Microsoft, the new kings of gaming.

 

[a0161613]

So it's being made into a better game. Improvement.

The best FPS of all time won't be improved with HD graphics.

And made better. Aren't you supposed to be making a case for the 80's though?

I am recognising how great a game it was, featuring a character that was made by the company which (as pointed out) saved the industry. Mario has fronted so many great and influential games in the last 25 years that he alone makes the 80's credible.

Made better again, but even if there was no Mario it would just be some other character being made into a better game.

Which is my point; there is not a huge amount of successul and original IP's anymore

So the big names are Mario, Sonic, and what Pac Man? Should I list the big names my decade has introduced? About ten fold more than the other decades. Like I said, Mario and Sonic are still around because of nostalia, and of two companies that developed those characters one is out of business and the other isn't on the same level as Sony or Microsoft, the new kings of gaming.

I'm not going to break down this last post because it's easier to do it this way.

• I have already mentioned loads of games that came out in the 80's. Mario and Zelda for two, my first post in the thread lists them all.
• How many truly successful new IP's have been created in the 00's?
• Mario exist because his games have domoniated their eras on a level that only other Nintendo-created characters can compare. Nostalgia sells, because as has already been pointed out, the kids of the 80's are the parents of today.
• Nintendo are a level above Sony and Microsoft when it comes to creating games and memorable franchises and characters.
• If they wanted to compete in HD gaming, then no doubt they could do it. They are already dominating handheld gaming with ease so to say they could not comepete is ridiculous.

 

[Lee]

I think people seem to be forgetting what this debate is about, it's not a Nintendo v the world thread, it's actually about which decade was the most important in gaming.

You can automatically discount the 80s for the simple fact aside from Nintendo there was nothing of the industry as the crash so kindly reminded us.

The 90s was such a mish mash it was unbelivable, lots of Sega and Nintendo riding off coat-tails of things that happened late 80s and the PSX was Sony finding its feet.

So welcome the 00s. Sega died and Nintendo took note, they realised that if they wanted to survive they needed to do what they did in the 80s and to a lesser extent with the N64 and that was innovate. Innovate they did, bringing us the touch screen DS and the Wii, whilst the look of the DS is a throwback to the game and watch they're completely different systems. Have you ever played a game and watch? I have, they're terrible. Again the Wii took something not possible before and gave us reliable motion control, I'm sure someone has mentioned motion control in the 80s, but you forget...it was shit.

The PS2 gave us a built in DVD player, the X Box a big hard drive, both with online gaming. PS3 became a media machine and the 360 competed.

The 00's were a perfect blend where ideas and things that were not actually possible before in the 20 years metioned previously and took them to workable levels. Online gaming is so accessible, motion control is so easy, nostalgia games are there (we didn't have nostalgia in the 80s for gaming!). It literally has something for everyone, something the other two decades did not have.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

But you know as well as I do that this isn't about what came first. We'd all be talking Pong consoles and such. IC25 seemed to realize this too, thus why these three specific decades were chosen as the topics. The importance of the 80's isn't simply that "it came first" or got big first, but that the crash and subsequent recovery dramatically changed the direction of the industry from top to bottom, from how things were marketed, and to whom, to how games and consoles were designed.

Indeed I do know, and I’m glad you pointed out that this isn’t about who, or what came first. Though seemingly many defenders of the 80’s don’t seem to realize this, and I was simply pointing this out to debunk any future arguments defending the 80’s as the “be all” creator of videogames.

But if not for Nintendo's innovations, there would have been no one to fix it. Most American game development and publishing companies had folded over by this point. Nintendo, developing it's approach to the American market, first tried to enter into partnership with Atari, hoping to benefit from it's still somewhat good name, and even they wanted nothing to do with gaming at that point.

I’m not going to argue against the Nintendo, as it’s tough to make a case that it didn’t have the biggest impact on at home gaming consoles, but again, it’s just ONE system. It diffidently had a major impact on gaming, and it’s probably the most important system of all time; but it’s the Nintendo’s success that really opened the door for the 90’s to take over and launch gaming to place it had never been before. I can only be thankful for what Nintendo did for gaming, but the level and amounts of innovation that took place in the 90’s is just too much for the 80’s to compete with. Credit goes to the Nintedo, no doubt about it, but that’s about all the eighties are known for in the field of gaming, while the 90’s have quite the list of innovations, thanks in part to the 80’s of course, but the 90’s capitalized in a way that the 80’s failed to do.

Also, there was no consumer demand for this stuff anymore, which is why most companies didn't care. Toy stores no longer viewed them as a product that would sell, especially for their high costs, and had been burned by merchandise they could not return to the publishers and manufacturers, and were forced to sell off for a loss. Customers just didn't trust the stuff anymore.

This is the fault of the 80’s though, bad decision led to the downfall of gaming in the 80’s and they redeemed themselves, but it doesn’t cancel out the fact that they made the faulty decision that led to the downfall in the eighties. Consumers had no reason to trust in high priced videogames, as the money wasn’t worth the product, until the original NES was released, five years into your decade. It’s just a lot of wasted time digging out of a self made hole, where the 90’s hit the ground running, and running hard all throughout the generation, with constant ever changing innovation to the field of videogames.

Both NEC and Sega only eyed the American Market after Nintendo had already saved it, that was the point I was going for. Sega and NEC weren't prepared to salvage American home console gaming as Nintendo was. The point isn't about why the Genesis/Mega Drive was made, but in why the it, and the Master System before it, even made it to our shores.

Nintendo reopened the door for American gaming, which was eventually going to get done one way or another. The success of Nintendo definitely helped to open the market for gaming back up, but I feel the 90’s did a better job at capitalizing on the situation, as they had much more time to do so. If so much time wasn’t wasted in the beginning of the 80’s it would have led to more time for innovation in the 80’s, but it was because of that failure in the begging that led to the 90’s having more time to capitalize on the success of the Nintendo.

Negotiations began as early as '86 for CD technology to be incorporated into what became the SNES. At the time, Nintendo still viewed disc ad-ons as a neat addition, but underestimated their potential impact on gaming, while Sony, who had supplied Nintendo with chips for years, still had doubts about committing to home console gaming without piggybacking off of Nintendo. Had Nintendo not succeeded in reviving the American market, Sony would not have set in motion the project that became the PlayStation.

It wasn’t until these two went to war with each other that Sony really broke out, and that break out happened in the nineties. While a lot of seeds where planted in the nineties, they barely began to sprout until the nineties, and they went beyond sprouting in the nineties, but where doused in buckets of miracle growth that saw all companies have success and not just Nintendo.

Let me put it this way: The Wii and the GameCube (00's product) were not nearly as reliant on the success of the N64 (90's product) before it as the SNES (other 90's product) was reliant on the breakaway success of the NES. If not for Sega and NEC entering the American market themselves after adopting Nintendo's methods, Nintendo would not have hurried to have the SNES out by 1990. They only felt pressure to introduce the product after the Genesis had been released to America. There could have been no GameCube console, and a Wii console would have still been possible and as marketable, simply because of the Nintendo name. A name that became synonymous with modern gaming in 80's.

I’ll give you Nintendo’s success, but it was the gaming war of the 90’s that truly opened up competition for all who wanted to join in. It wasn’t until the nineties rolled around that companies started to constantly one up each other, and it was because of that battle that we saw a flurry of technological advances in all areas of gaming. Everyone had to have that edge, and that wasn’t there in the eighties, the eighties everyone was trying to stay afloat, the nineties where more about who had the fancier yacht.

The thing is, until the crash, and the shift in power to Japanese companies, American companies were doing even worse with moving things along. As far as handhelds go, the GameBoy success is hardwired to the fate of the NES in American, without a doubt. And this is about the importance of a generation, and I feel that having more important events that reach us even now, 30 years later, is a better qualification than having better technology or popularity. Aside from a lawsuit against Sega which was successful, though ultimately pointless, the standards that Nintendo introduced have shaped and influenced the policies of every major console manufacturer in the world today. It's not really time wasted if it was worth it in the end. Time wasted would be the death of Sega in the home console market; a stark reminder of how important the lessons of the 80's are.

While magic was definitely worked to turn such a grim situation for gaming into one of, if not the most influential systems of all time, time lost is still time lost. The nineties lost absolutely no time in their advancement of videogames, and while the Nintendo may be the most influential system, it doesn’t make the eighties the most influential generation. I feel the time lost is one of the main things separating the 80’s from the 90’s. With no time lost in the nineties we finally saw home consoles and videogames being released on a much more consistent basis, with every company trying to outmatch their opponent, and that’s something the eighties didn’t have. The eighties where dominated by Nintendo, and for a healthy market you need to have competition, and that’s what the nineties provided, consistent competition, which in turn led to the constant evolution of consoles and videogames.

 

[D-Man]

I think people seem to be forgetting what this debate is about, it's not a Nintendo v the world thread, it's actually about which decade was the most important in gaming.

I wanted to boldface this statement because I think everyone, Lee included, is losing sight of this.

important - Having relevant and crucial value

Are graphic enhancements relevant and crucial values towards gaming? Hard drives? Online gaming? How is including a DVD player on a gaming console important for video gaming?? Sure, it adds flavor to the consoles. Yes, it enhanced video gaming and brought it to new heights. But was it important? The consoles worked just fine in the 1980's before crazy graphics, memory cards, online gameplay, etc. were discovered.

To me, the most important enhancement to ever happen in video games was giving them the ability to be played in the homes of gamers. No longer would gamers have to drive to an arcade and pop nickels, dimes, and quarters into machines in order to enjoy gameplay. Now they could hook up a few wires to their televisions, grab a controller, and play in the sanctity of their own homes. To me, THAT is importance in gaming. And that happened in the late 1970's and throughout the 1980's.

 

[Lee]

To me, the most important enhancement to ever happen in video games was giving them the ability to be played in the homes of gamers. No longer would gamers have to drive to an arcade and pop nickels, dimes, and quarters into machines in order to enjoy gameplay. Now they could hook up a few wires to their televisions, grab a controller, and play in the sanctity of their own homes. To me, THAT is importance in gaming. And that happened in the late 1970's and throughout the 1980's.

Think to the 80s, I had a console then as most little peeps did. Now think of the rich kid in school, how many games did he have for his console? We're talking NES here not easily pirated 2nd generation stuff. Why that would be a handful of games. One or two major releases a year. You'd have to wait for the rents to be done with the TV etc etc.

Think to the 2000's. Think of yourself now, how many games did you purchase in a year there, I know I buy at least one a month. In a time where in the 80s I had a handful of NES games, now I'm very much able to buy a handful of games per six months. Gaming has just become more accessible, more quality games are released with major games coming out left right and centre.

The stat I remember from when I used to sell these bad boys was this: In the 80s/90s gaming was always 80% sales would be consoles, 20% would be software. Now it's 80% Software to 20% Hardware because they're just so damn accessible.

So what's more important? Playing one new game a year or playing one new game a month or even weekly if you wanted to hire them!

 

[Ferbian]

I wanted to boldface this statement because I think everyone, Lee included, is losing sight of this.



Are graphic enhancements relevant and crucial values towards gaming? Hard drives? Online gaming? How is including a DVD player on a gaming console important for video gaming?? Sure, it adds flavor to the consoles. Yes, it enhanced video gaming and brought it to new heights. But was it important? The consoles worked just fine in the 1980's before crazy graphics, memory cards, online gameplay, etc. were discovered.

Yet D, you can't possibly discredit the fact that while they functioned just fine back then, adding a harddrive, adding a DVD-drive etc. brings a much more flowing experience to video gaming. So obviously it has influence in the importance of improving video gaming.

Wouldn't you agree it would suck if we were still stuck in an era of 2D gaming and simpler game-play because we were stuck with the CD's (Or whatever they used back then, I'm not that old-school on video games). As opposed to converting to a DVD, which would require the gaming platforms to implement the DVD-drive, which would mean therefore, more space for the bigger and more improved games.

The 00's shouldn't be discredited just because the consoles were fine. Especially not considering that the 00's made the consoles great. They expanded beyond what we've seen before, and they revolutionized the experience and flow in video gaming by implementing better hardware, to deal with better games, to give an overall better experience for every gamer.

All of the improvements, and new availabilities (online gaming, new games, new consoles etc.) is more than important to keep it all going, keep it interesting. That's all what marketing is about, to keep things interesting and keep people hungering for more. And oh boy did the 00's feed that hunger. I've already addressed the numerous of material that the 00's have fed the young gamers of today and tomorrow, where as while the 80's and the 90's have fed them as well, they don't hold a candle to the 00's.

 

[D-Man]

The stat I remember from when I used to sell these bad boys was this: In the 80s/90s gaming was always 80% sales would be consoles, 20% would be software. Now it's 80%Software to 20%Hardware because they're just so damn accessible.

So what's more important? Playing one new game a year or playing one new game a month or even weekly if you wanted to hire them!

This point is excellent. I will absolutely admit that. But I'm always the type of person that views an idea's roots when viewing it's importance. As much as I agree with Lee's statement, I still feel that the importance of accessibility wouldn't even be a consideration had gaming consoles not been given the ability to be played in a gamer's home.

Yet D, you can't possibly discredit the fact that while they functioned just fine back then, adding a harddrive, adding a DVD-drive etc. brings a much more flowing experience to video gaming. So obviously it has influence in the importance of improving video gaming.

Wouldn't you agree it would suck if we were still stuck in an era of 2D gaming and simpler game-play because we were stuck with the CD's (Or whatever they used back then, I'm not that old-school on video games). As opposed to converting to a DVD, which would require the gaming platforms to implement the DVD-drive, which would mean therefore, more space for the bigger and more improved games.

The 00's shouldn't be discredited just because the consoles were fine. Especially not considering that the 00's made the consoles great. They expanded beyond what we've seen before, and they revolutionized the experience and flow in video gaming by implementing better hardware, to deal with better games, to give an overall better experience for every gamer.

All of the improvements, and new availabilities (online gaming, new games, new consoles etc.) is more than important to keep it all going, keep it interesting. That's all what marketing is about, to keep things interesting and keep people hungering for more. And oh boy did the 00's feed that hunger. I've already addressed the numerous of material that the 00's have fed the young gamers of today and tomorrow, where as while the 80's and the 90's have fed them as well, they don't hold a candle to the 00's.

Once again, that's all fine and good. But this is more like saying that a gun was an important invention. But it was more important for a gun to get a laser-scope because it enhanced its abilities, improved the usage by your average sportsman, and attracted more buyers. But as we all know, that's total bullshit. A gun is important because of its purpose and the reason for its creation.

We all know how far gaming and consoles have come. There is no denying that. I'm not sitting here and saying that the 00's weren't important and the 80's were. I'm merely saying that the 80's barely edge out the other decades because of the technology that changed everything... putting the consoles inside gamers' homes.

Ferbs, you even admitted that you're not old school with gaming. So that means that you weren't as satisfied as me when the NES, Coleco, or Atari came out. I was stoked about the fact that I could play games in my bedroom. I could have given two shits about the graphics.

The problem with the younger generations is that you're all so spoiled with what you were born into that you never got the chance to realize what it was like for a system like NES to be played in your home when there weren't other alternatives available at the time. You guys were born when multiple systems actually EXISTED. Fuck if they got enhanced over time... you guys always had gaming systems around. Well I didn't. BIG difference.

 

[a0161613]

I didn't do it deliberatly, but I do think that the influence of other games has been overlooked. I'll share responsibility for that as I am a bit of a Nintendo nut and was until I was quite old.

The key word here is influence. So many games have either franchises born in the 80's or have influences which can be traced back as such. Wii Sports can be traced directly back to the old Nintendo Baseball and Golf games. And Duck Hunt, while it has been referred to in this thread as an FPS, could easily be referred to as as a on-rails shooter and with its' gun controller, it set a precedent for the modern day console equivalent. I guess that would be Playstation Move?

• Metal Gear has created one of the biggest franchises ever.
• Tetris is the best puzzle game ever and Street Fighter is the fighting equivalent.
• Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest are two of the biggest-selling JRPG's ever; both started in the 80's. Most Western developers wish they could get a tenth of the sales and attention that Final Fantasy and DQ create over there.
• Zelda has influenced every adventure game since its' release, just like Mario did.
• And I know Pac Man is Pac Man but it is still a highly popular concept.

Sure, games were made better as the years went by but wasn't that inevitable in most cases, due to simple evolution? In many cases, you would be foolish to discount the importance of the original games that came out in the last five.heck before you make assumptions like you did in another thread.

 

[Ferbian]

Once again, that's all fine and good. But this is more like saying that a gun was an important invention. But it was more important for a gun to get a laser-scope because it enhanced its abilities, improved the usage by your average sportsman, and attracted more buyers. But as we all know, that's total bullshit. A gun is important because of its purpose and the reason for its creation.

I know what you mean mate. But still to completely discredit the improvement of hardware implemented into the consoles when talking about influencing video gaming is just wrong.

Like I covered in my first post for this, there's more than just the hardware improvements that have made the 00's a much more influential decade. Not only has the hardware helped influence it all, but the things implemented into gaming that caused the hardware's need to improve really balances it all out.

Video gaming being a standard implementation with 3D gaming all around in RPG's, FPS' and some strategy games which is pretty much the 3 biggest parts of video gaming today, just shows how much the 00's have improved, and why the hardware being implemented and improved constantly is always gonna be in need.

 

[Big Sexy]

Another argument for the 90's that hasn't been made yet is the evolution of "sports games." Now I realize sport games were around well before the 90's but they didn't become that good and popular until the 90's thanks to EA sports. EA Sports was a company created in the 80's but like many things from the 80's it didn't achieve much success until the 90's. Let's go over some of the game franchises.

Madden- Probably the biggest sports gaming franchise in the US. The Madden game came out in 1988 but it was only for PC's and the game ran very slowly. It didn't really achieve success until late 1990, early 1991. This is when it first went away from just PC's and came out on the console. John Madden Football was one of the initial games that helped turn both EA and the Sega Genesis around as it allowed the Genesis to gain market shares on the SNES. Then once Madden got licensed with the NFL in 1993 it took off even more.

NBA Live- The longest lasting NBA game. Originally called "Lakers versus Celtics and the NBA Playoffs" it was first released for consoles in 1991 after being just a PC game in 1989 and not being too successful. The actual NBA Live series was released in 1995 for the Sega Genesis and SNES. Another successful video game franchise that achieved it's first major success in the 90's.

NHL- The most successful hockey series, first released in 1991 for the Genesis. The following year it also started to appear for the SNES as well. No roots at all in the 80's for this series.

I can go on and on with other sports

FIFA- Started in 1993
College Football- Started in 1993
Triple Play Baseball- 1997
Golf- 1990
Rugby- 1995

The 90's was THE decade for sports games. Maybe I'm one of few but sports games are by far my favorite type and almost every game I currently own is a sports game. You can thank the 90's for making these games as well as EA Sports relevant.

 

[D-Man]

Another argument for the 90's that hasn't been made yet is the evolution of "sports games." Now I realize sport games were around well before the 90's but they didn't become that good and popular until the 90's thanks to EA sports. EA Sports was a company created in the 80's but like many things from the 80's it didn't achieve much success until the 90's. Let's go over some of the game franchises.

Madden- Probably the biggest sports gaming franchise in the US. The Madden game came out in 1988 but it was only for PC's and the game ran very slowly. It didn't really achieve success until late 1990, early 1991. This is when it first went away from just PC's and came out on the console. John Madden Football was one of the initial games that helped turn both EA and the Sega Genesis around as it allowed the Genesis to gain market shares on the SNES. Then once Madden got licensed with the NFL in 1993 it took off even more.

NBA Live- The longest lasting NBA game. Originally called "Lakers versus Celtics and the NBA Playoffs" it was first released for consoles in 1991 after being just a PC game in 1989 and not being too successful. The actual NBA Live series was released in 1995 for the Sega Genesis and SNES. Another successful video game franchise that achieved it's first major success in the 90's.

NHL- The most successful hockey series, first released in 1991 for the Genesis. The following year it also started to appear for the SNES as well. No roots at all in the 80's for this series.

I can go on and on with other sports

FIFA- Started in 1993
College Football- Started in 1993
Triple Play Baseball- 1997
Golf- 1990
Rugby- 1995

The 90's was THE decade for sports games. Maybe I'm one of few but sports games are by far my favorite type and almost every game I currently own is a sports game. You can thank the 90's for making these games as well as EA Sports relevant.

As true as all of this is, we can also say that the 80's was the decade of side-scrolling adventure games. It saw the creation of Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, Super Mario Brothers, Zelda, Metroid... I could also go on.

Every decade is going to see improvement in specific genres of gaming. There's no doubt about that. But importance of an entire era definitely revolves around more than this argument.

Hope you didn't take that the wrong way, Sexy. Your argument is still solid... with a few holes.