Well, qwasn't alive to remember most of the sighties, however I have played many older games.

Older games are generally straightforward and easy to play. However, the creators find a way to make the game more and more challenging as you get farther along. This is great, if you don't want to have to read complicated manuals and experiment with the program to find out how to play a game. Games are designed to be fun, with minimal requirements from the user outside of controlling whatever object they should be controlling.

On the other hand, I find that newer games look better with their more advanced graphics, and have more expandable capabilities. SimCity is a good example. Originally released in 1989, it was a simple game where the user developed a city using basic controls. It soon became a classic, with its open-ended simulation approach to gaming. The game soon evolved into SimCity 2000, which was released in 1993. This version had improved controls, more capabilities, and MUCH better graphics. SimCity 3000 was just about the same thing, in a 3D environment with improved graphics (but with lots of unresolved bugs). The newest game, SimCity 4, fixes all this and improves the graphics. Now that I've given you a history of the game, I reach my point. SimCity 4 arives in a box along with two manuals, totalling about 75 pages of documentation. Who actually wants to read that stuff? I'd much rather play Rodent (an old Microsoft game) than play a game where you would really have to read that stuff. Luckily SimCity 4 isn't hard to figure out, but it does end up being just about as exciting as Rodent, once you realize you are playing a terrific game where you ACTUALLY HAVE TO TRY TO LOSE IN ORDER TO LOSE ANYWAY! At least it beats The Sims, where you just plain CAN'T lose! I mean there's no possible way! Maxis even says so!

My conclusion: Graphics are good. Overly easy games can't be fixed by good graphics. SimCity is cool.

MA"shirts with question marks on them sound cool"NGO