Personally, I think they are not bad for their time. You can't simply think that a game made in 1998 has bad graphics, because all of the normal PCs from 1998 were too weak for realistic graphics. We think that old games have bad graphics because, every new game has better graphics than the last one. We forget that the game looks realistic for it's own time. And then we start having the illusion that the old game looks bad.
Yes, I do agree that the graphics of the old games aren't very good, because I know that the engine is old. But I am NOT saying that the graphics of the game are bad because "Avatar the game" has better ones (this is something completely wrong).
I think most game developers think about the graphics more than the game-play. Thats why Avatar has bad game-play and good graphics. Which is really bad, mostly because the game is expensive, and when you buy it, you get f**ked.
So, do you agree? Or do you disagree?
P.S. I wander which game is better: Half Life or Avatar?