Random Gaming Thoughts

[BurningDoom]

I said I like NES boxes more than modern boxes because there's more artwork.

That's a rephrasing of what you originally said.

Yep, I made a completely innocent post about liking NES boxes. And you devolved it into this and sucked any joy out of it.

[dsheinem]

I said I like NES boxes more than modern boxes because there's more artwork.

That's a rephrasing of what you originally said.

Yep, I made a completely innocent post about liking NES boxes. And you devolved it into this and sucked any joy out of it.

You made a claim that NES cover art was better than contemporary cover art because it lacked logos and "boarders" to get in the way of the artwork itself (which was the basis for why you preferred it). Oddly, you posted a picture of games that had a lot of logos and some borders on them to prove your point. I am simply trying to refute that claim by showing you that there are plenty of NES covers that are cluttered and logo-centric (often blocking the art or forcing it into a small area) and that there are plenty of contemporary games with less clutter/logos.

I am not trying to suggest that you shouldn't like NES cover art or that there aren't examples where logofication is minimal, but I am suggesting that you shouldn't rely on a false blanket claim about box art as justification for a preference.

[BurningDoom]

You made a claim that NES cover art was better than contemporary cover art because it lacked logos and "boarders" to get in the way of the artwork itself (which was the basis for why you preferred it). Oddly, you posted a picture of games that had a lot of logos and some borders on them to prove your point. I am simply trying to refute that claim by showing you that there are plenty of NES covers that are cluttered and logo-centric (often blocking the art or forcing it into a small area) and that there are plenty of contemporary games with less clutter/logos.

I am not trying to suggest that you shouldn't like NES cover art or that there aren't examples where logofication is minimal, but I am suggesting that you shouldn't rely on a false blanket claim about box art as justification for a preference.

Dsh, the crusader of misinformation everywhere. Give me a break, everyone else on this thread knew exactly what I meant, and it was even clarified to you later in the thread that it was up to the publisher to put the borders or not. And you're still arguing this point that I'm not.

You are always going around here pissing all over everyone else's posts. This is nothing new. I picture you as a jaded, bitter old man who loves nothing more than to gripe and grumble at everyone else's good time.

[BogusMeatFactory]

You made a claim that NES cover art was better than contemporary cover art because it lacked logos and "boarders" to get in the way of the artwork itself (which was the basis for why you preferred it). Oddly, you posted a picture of games that had a lot of logos and some borders on them to prove your point. I am simply trying to refute that claim by showing you that there are plenty of NES covers that are cluttered and logo-centric (often blocking the art or forcing it into a small area) and that there are plenty of contemporary games with less clutter/logos.

I am not trying to suggest that you shouldn't like NES cover art or that there aren't examples where logofication is minimal, but I am suggesting that you shouldn't rely on a false blanket claim about box art as justification for a preference.

The world is not entirely logic fueled. This argument seems juvenile. He did not post up boxes with logos that impeded the artwork so just get over it. You talk about refuting claims and false blanket claims and a whole plethora of nonsense to nitpick and ruin someone sharing a positive experience about video games.

Please stop doing this.

[alienjesus]

I normally stay out of pointless arguments like this, but jesus guys, shut the fuck up. This has been going on for pages on end, and days on end and it's really fucking boring.

[TSTR]

[BoringSupreez]

You made a claim that NES cover art was better than contemporary cover art because it lacked logos and "boarders" to get in the way of the artwork itself (which was the basis for why you preferred it). Oddly, you posted a picture of games that had a lot of logos and some borders on them to prove your point. I am simply trying to refute that claim by showing you that there are plenty of NES covers that are cluttered and logo-centric (often blocking the art or forcing it into a small area) and that there are plenty of contemporary games with less clutter/logos.

I am not trying to suggest that you shouldn't like NES cover art or that there aren't examples where logofication is minimal, but I am suggesting that you shouldn't rely on a false blanket claim about box art as justification for a preference.

Dsh, the crusader of misinformation everywhere. Give me a break, everyone else on this thread knew exactly what I meant, and it was even clarified to you later in the thread that it was up to the publisher to put the borders or not. And you're still arguing this point that I'm not.

You are always going around here pissing all over everyone else's posts. This is nothing new. I picture you as a jaded, bitter old man who loves nothing more than to gripe and grumble at everyone else's good time.

And knowing this, you still fell for it.

You guys take things too seriously sometimes. Forums need a little disagreement to fuel discussions; a retrogaming circlejerk would be boring.

[BogusMeatFactory]

I like you.

[TSTR]

I like you.

I like you too!

[dsheinem]

The world is not entirely logic fueled. This argument seems juvenile. He did not post up boxes with logos that impeded the artwork so just get over it. You talk about refuting claims and false blanket claims and a whole plethora of nonsense to nitpick and ruin someone sharing a positive experience about video games.

Please stop doing this.

I'm not crazy, he was making claims comparing the art and design of NES boxes to modern ones:

I love NES boxes. Pure artwork. No stupid color schemes or logos to get in the way.

But everyone could do what they wanted. You didn't have to have neon-green borders for Xbox, or blue-boarders for PS4, or whatever the system scheme was what I meant.

The Nintendo logos are tiny and hardly as hindering to the artwork as Xbox neon green borders and logos all over the place.

That little tiny little Nintendo Seal of Quality is just like the neon green uniformity of Xbox titles or similar things.

Yes there are borders on some NES games, but that was the choice of the publisher. It wasn't enforced on every game, like modern games. And the little Nintendo logo is hardly the same as the bright neon green borders or blue borders of a PS4 games.

I like NES boxes more because there's more artwork. There is an obvious difference between the two.

These are blanket claims about NES boxes, many of them comparing them to boxes in the present day. I shouldn't be made to feel like an asshole because I actually took on his claims and tried to suggest that he was generalizing, that he was basing his views on nostalgia, and that if you look at box art of NES games and games today there's a full range of games with more or less art.

If he'd just said "I really like the NES boxes without a lot of logos and borders" that would have been fine, but when he claims they are all this way or compares them to games in the present he is presenting an argument.

Yes, it is a stupid thing to argue about and no I don't begrudge him an opinion of preferring the NES boxes over new ones (I prefer them as well), but when he grounds that argument in demonstrably inaccurate claims he should expect someone to question them.