The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Taken and re-written from another thread:
What might be interesting is if Nintendo gained permission to use a
few licences to further introduce their gameplay to the masses.
For example:
Metroid Prime engine used to make game based on the Alien universe (or Alien vs Predator to be more current).
Zelda engine used for a Forgotten Realms game.
Pikmin engine used for a twisted Gremlins game.
Other companies do it with successful engines, allowing them to
release several interesting titles in a year. Nintendo used to let
Rare cannibalise their engines to make new games, I think the
tradition should continue with other Nintendo partners and in a more mainstream way to cover all bases.
and the beauty of it is, it would be very easy to do.
What might be interesting is if Nintendo gained permission to use a
few licences to further introduce their gameplay to the masses.
For example:
Metroid Prime engine used to make game based on the Alien universe (or Alien vs Predator to be more current).
Zelda engine used for a Forgotten Realms game.
Pikmin engine used for a twisted Gremlins game.
Other companies do it with successful engines, allowing them to
release several interesting titles in a year. Nintendo used to let
Rare cannibalise their engines to make new games, I think the
tradition should continue with other Nintendo partners and in a more mainstream way to cover all bases.
and the beauty of it is, it would be very easy to do.
Page:
Dringo wrote:
> But there would need to be changes or Nintendo would get criticised
> for basically making a sequel with a different name.
>
> A.K.A Banjo Kazooie and Donkey Kong 64.
That was different.
It wasn't JUST the engine that stayed the same.
Gameplay mechanics, level design style, the music - heck, some of the sections were EXACTLY the same...
So many things that worked beautifully for Banjo were out of place with Donkey Kong. As I've said before, Crash Bandicoot was a LOT closer to the Donkey Kong Country "feel".
> But there would need to be changes or Nintendo would get criticised
> for basically making a sequel with a different name.
>
> A.K.A Banjo Kazooie and Donkey Kong 64.
That was different.
It wasn't JUST the engine that stayed the same.
Gameplay mechanics, level design style, the music - heck, some of the sections were EXACTLY the same...
So many things that worked beautifully for Banjo were out of place with Donkey Kong. As I've said before, Crash Bandicoot was a LOT closer to the Donkey Kong Country "feel".
Whitestripes DX wrote:
> I think engine discussion is boring, so I'm not commenting.
Consider the possibilities some more and you'll find you're wrong. I'm talking about using existing engines to promote Nintendo's gameplay mechanics with new licences.
Thinking of what decent licences the engines would suit is the interesting part.
> I think engine discussion is boring, so I'm not commenting.
Consider the possibilities some more and you'll find you're wrong. I'm talking about using existing engines to promote Nintendo's gameplay mechanics with new licences.
Thinking of what decent licences the engines would suit is the interesting part.
I think it is a fantastic idea and it may happen.
Nintendo have talked about re-using the Wind Waker engine for a very different game. Never seen it though.
It would be nice to see some game engines used and changed a little for new games.
But there would need to be changes or Nintendo would get criticised for basically making a sequel with a different name.
A.K.A Banjo Kazooie and Donkey Kong 64.
Nintendo have talked about re-using the Wind Waker engine for a very different game. Never seen it though.
It would be nice to see some game engines used and changed a little for new games.
But there would need to be changes or Nintendo would get criticised for basically making a sequel with a different name.
A.K.A Banjo Kazooie and Donkey Kong 64.
munn wrote:
>
> So what does that leave you with then?
> Buttons to change weapons and fancy graphics.
> Errr, anyone can do that.
Nope, it's all about balance.
>
> So what does that leave you with then?
> Buttons to change weapons and fancy graphics.
> Errr, anyone can do that.
Nope, it's all about balance.
Chr1s wrote:
> gerrid wrote:
> hahah pwnd
>
> I can't believe people don't check their spelling before they post.
Ahahahahahahahahahaha.
Wonderful.
> gerrid wrote:
> hahah pwnd
>
> I can't believe people don't check their spelling before they post.
Ahahahahahahahahahaha.
Wonderful.
Hedfix wrote:
Start posting like
> adults in a decent thread otherwise go back to your favourite
> pacifier.
>
Modesty is one of your better traits then?
I think engine discussion is boring, so I'm not commenting.
Except that one ^
Start posting like
> adults in a decent thread otherwise go back to your favourite
> pacifier.
>
Modesty is one of your better traits then?
I think engine discussion is boring, so I'm not commenting.
Except that one ^
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> Free Radical would be superb if they did a straight forward style 1st
> person shooter.
>
> Loose the lock on aiming and adventure elements and you've got a Halo
> beater on your hands.
So what does that leave you with then?
Buttons to change weapons and fancy graphics.
Errr, anyone can do that.
> Free Radical would be superb if they did a straight forward style 1st
> person shooter.
>
> Loose the lock on aiming and adventure elements and you've got a Halo
> beater on your hands.
So what does that leave you with then?
Buttons to change weapons and fancy graphics.
Errr, anyone can do that.
Chr1s wrote:
> mermoid wrote:
> You're the one who looks stupid for not knowing the significance of
> pwn.
>
> For future reference, what does it mean?
pwn - vb - pronounced: pwn - to pwn something
> mermoid wrote:
> You're the one who looks stupid for not knowing the significance of
> pwn.
>
> For future reference, what does it mean?
pwn - vb - pronounced: pwn - to pwn something
Free Radical would be superb if they did a straight forward style 1st person shooter.
Loose the lock on aiming and adventure elements and you've got a Halo beater on your hands.
Loose the lock on aiming and adventure elements and you've got a Halo beater on your hands.
Chr1s wrote:
> Was there any point to this? Why bother copying and pasting what
> someone else has already done and drawing no further conclusions from
> it.
Because
A: I wrote it so I can do what the hell I like with it.
B: The issue appears to have been overlooked in the other thread (which has about 10 different topics in it already
C: I thought it'd be more interesting than the usual 3 year old one-up-manship that can so frequently be found in this forum.
You want people to treat Nintendo seriously? Start posting like adults in a decent thread otherwise go back to your favourite pacifier.
I await some quality discussion from the forum regulars.
> Was there any point to this? Why bother copying and pasting what
> someone else has already done and drawing no further conclusions from
> it.
Because
A: I wrote it so I can do what the hell I like with it.
B: The issue appears to have been overlooked in the other thread (which has about 10 different topics in it already
C: I thought it'd be more interesting than the usual 3 year old one-up-manship that can so frequently be found in this forum.
You want people to treat Nintendo seriously? Start posting like adults in a decent thread otherwise go back to your favourite pacifier.
I await some quality discussion from the forum regulars.
Page: