The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
That's what Nintendo are relying on in the next round of the console wars.
The Nintendo difference consists of 4 factors, those being Innovation, Quality, Characters and Heritage.
It really is nothing different to what Nintendo have been doing before, only now, it seems that they're going to make a bit of a song and dance about it. Shout it out and make people listen.
Nintendo's games have, for the large portion, always been quality, and I have found Nintendos games to be amongst the most innovative available on any console. Their only rival in this field has become an ally, Sega. Sega are the masters of innovation, and it will be great to see a number of their franchises available on a Nintendo machine.
Nintendo have a wealth of popular characters, and by throwing them all together in one game, Super Smash Bros: Melee, it will keep many of these characters in the public eye. Samus will be there to remind people that Metroid is on the way (like you can forget), Fox is in there to remind you that Dinosaur Planet is also available. Then there's the Pokemon, and they're bound to appear on the 'CUBE sooner or later.
I gather we'll be seeing lots of Nintendo characters, maybe even some from NES days (Kid Icarus, you heard it here first), coming into games that are more than just sequels., such as Donkey Kong appearing in a racer, and Luigi 'cowering like a cowardly coward' (Ant) in his haunted mansion.
Also, this said, it's highly likely that we'll see Mario sooner or later. Probably sooner...
So remember it's the Nintendo difference!
The Nintendo difference consists of 4 factors, those being Innovation, Quality, Characters and Heritage.
It really is nothing different to what Nintendo have been doing before, only now, it seems that they're going to make a bit of a song and dance about it. Shout it out and make people listen.
Nintendo's games have, for the large portion, always been quality, and I have found Nintendos games to be amongst the most innovative available on any console. Their only rival in this field has become an ally, Sega. Sega are the masters of innovation, and it will be great to see a number of their franchises available on a Nintendo machine.
Nintendo have a wealth of popular characters, and by throwing them all together in one game, Super Smash Bros: Melee, it will keep many of these characters in the public eye. Samus will be there to remind people that Metroid is on the way (like you can forget), Fox is in there to remind you that Dinosaur Planet is also available. Then there's the Pokemon, and they're bound to appear on the 'CUBE sooner or later.
I gather we'll be seeing lots of Nintendo characters, maybe even some from NES days (Kid Icarus, you heard it here first), coming into games that are more than just sequels., such as Donkey Kong appearing in a racer, and Luigi 'cowering like a cowardly coward' (Ant) in his haunted mansion.
Also, this said, it's highly likely that we'll see Mario sooner or later. Probably sooner...
So remember it's the Nintendo difference!
Page:
Goatboy, who brought the game, was it you, well then you only have yourself to blame, now go and listen to Pink Floyd....
:P
:P
Does every game have to have save points these days? What happened to the idea of playing through the game without making mistakes.
In order to have no save points, a feature which I quite like, it has to be relatively short - and yet it still offers an awful lot of replay value and for another refreshing change, is not a linear game. There are plenty of older games I think you'd agree are classics, which can all be completed in around an hour.
True, if you paid £60 you were conned. It couldn't be justified, even with the rather unimpressive contraotion which the rumble pack is. If you're worried about value for money, you should be buying second hand and seeling on when you're bored - can easily be done for no more than a £5-10 loss.
Blast corps was an excellent game. I had that one, too. I'll have to compare times on the Moon course sometime...
In order to have no save points, a feature which I quite like, it has to be relatively short - and yet it still offers an awful lot of replay value and for another refreshing change, is not a linear game. There are plenty of older games I think you'd agree are classics, which can all be completed in around an hour.
True, if you paid £60 you were conned. It couldn't be justified, even with the rather unimpressive contraotion which the rumble pack is. If you're worried about value for money, you should be buying second hand and seeling on when you're bored - can easily be done for no more than a £5-10 loss.
Blast corps was an excellent game. I had that one, too. I'll have to compare times on the Moon course sometime...
Yes, I played through it a few times to make sure I didnt miss anything.
I thought "er...that cant be the end"
Going back on a harder level?
Ohhh! That's fun.
Different routes? Hooray!
Did them. Did them all.
But to complete even the core of the game in less than an hour is obscene.
My view.
I'm not saying I'm right, I'm only saying I felt cheated and took the action I felt happy doing.
Namely selling the console and buying videos.
I had a load of games for my N64.
Blast Corps was fun.
Shadows of The Empire was bad (apart from snowspeeder level)
Goldeneye rocked.
I hated most of the games, and I will never forgive Nintendo for releasing Lylat Wars and charging that.
But here's the thing, it's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
Doesnt mean I'm right, doesnt mean I'm wrong.
I personally thought it sucked, and no amount of "Well you obviously missed loads" will change that.
I thought "er...that cant be the end"
Going back on a harder level?
Ohhh! That's fun.
Different routes? Hooray!
Did them. Did them all.
But to complete even the core of the game in less than an hour is obscene.
My view.
I'm not saying I'm right, I'm only saying I felt cheated and took the action I felt happy doing.
Namely selling the console and buying videos.
I had a load of games for my N64.
Blast Corps was fun.
Shadows of The Empire was bad (apart from snowspeeder level)
Goldeneye rocked.
I hated most of the games, and I will never forgive Nintendo for releasing Lylat Wars and charging that.
But here's the thing, it's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
Doesnt mean I'm right, doesnt mean I'm wrong.
I personally thought it sucked, and no amount of "Well you obviously missed loads" will change that.
I strongly dispute Goatboy's allegations of Lylat wars being a less-than-great game.
Right, perhaps you could complete it in under an hour withoput much trouble, but what does that mean? 'Completing' a game doesn't always mean just beating the last boss. If you can even suggest that finishing on the easiest setting is completing it, you're wrong. If you get on that path near the end, perhaps you should've counted it as a failure?
In Lylat wars, you have 15 or so levels to complete, and a lot to leanr about each. Medals are avialable to the skilled, and I believe you access a harder difficulty setting if you defeat the last level on the hardest setting whilst getting a medal for it. Once you've done that, you can do it all over again on the harder setting.
Did you even find out about that? I doubt it.
I really don't like it when a game doesn't take long to finish, but I didn't see Lylat wars that way. Take a game like CBFD (again) and there's very little replay value. With Lylat wars there is an awful lot of replay value, not least because of the excellent multiplayer mode.
Lylat wars was a game in which there were always bits you could improve on. There was a lot to learn on every level.
Did you ever try to finish the independance day level by destroying the mothership and your craft as you flew into the spire? Classic stuff!
I could go on, but I've probably made my point (or at least some point, hopefully).
Lylat Wars was a great game, though I can see you'd be unhappy if you got the £60 rumble pack bundled version. I got mine for £25 second hand, no rumble pack. Great value.
Hang on, I said I was going to stop, didn't I? Better do that then....
Right, perhaps you could complete it in under an hour withoput much trouble, but what does that mean? 'Completing' a game doesn't always mean just beating the last boss. If you can even suggest that finishing on the easiest setting is completing it, you're wrong. If you get on that path near the end, perhaps you should've counted it as a failure?
In Lylat wars, you have 15 or so levels to complete, and a lot to leanr about each. Medals are avialable to the skilled, and I believe you access a harder difficulty setting if you defeat the last level on the hardest setting whilst getting a medal for it. Once you've done that, you can do it all over again on the harder setting.
Did you even find out about that? I doubt it.
I really don't like it when a game doesn't take long to finish, but I didn't see Lylat wars that way. Take a game like CBFD (again) and there's very little replay value. With Lylat wars there is an awful lot of replay value, not least because of the excellent multiplayer mode.
Lylat wars was a game in which there were always bits you could improve on. There was a lot to learn on every level.
Did you ever try to finish the independance day level by destroying the mothership and your craft as you flew into the spire? Classic stuff!
I could go on, but I've probably made my point (or at least some point, hopefully).
Lylat Wars was a great game, though I can see you'd be unhappy if you got the £60 rumble pack bundled version. I got mine for £25 second hand, no rumble pack. Great value.
Hang on, I said I was going to stop, didn't I? Better do that then....
Dan uk wrote:
> No one makes games like Nintendo. I've also worked out why the PS2
> is slated as un original.
About half of the Gamecube releases are
> sequels, but hardly any of them are sequels to sequels. Let me
> explain.
At one point, the playstation had a whole load of
> original games:
Tombraider, Tekken, Ridgeracer, Resident Evil
> etc.
They were great games and sold well. Within a year, sequels
> and clones appeared, only being slightly better than the origianls.
> Nobody cared. They were still great games.
A year after that. the
> sequels has sequels along with several clones. People began to get
> sick of it. there were hundreds of Football and Formula one
> games.
Tombraider sequels/clones were everywhere and it all began
> to lose it's spark.
That's how the playstation got it's
> reputation.
Nintendo release sequels but they tend to only
> release one or two games in a series per console. They wait atleast
> 2 years before releasing a sequel. People have time to forget the
> old game and be nicely surprised by it's sequel.
It's only when a
> new sequel was being released every year to saturate the market,
> things were bad.
Devellopers should leave a 2 year gap atleast
> between a game and it's sequel. When Fifa released it's 3rd
> £40 game in a year, that's when people started to get really
> annoyed...
I agree, games like TR, Ridge Racer and FIFA went too far. Which is why I don't buy these games.
Also, look at the list of PS2 scheduled releases, and you won't find many sequels there! I believe this 'sequels' reputation Sony have is unfair, I mean, TR, FIFA and Ridge all came out on the PC, and the latter 2 came out on N64!
> No one makes games like Nintendo. I've also worked out why the PS2
> is slated as un original.
About half of the Gamecube releases are
> sequels, but hardly any of them are sequels to sequels. Let me
> explain.
At one point, the playstation had a whole load of
> original games:
Tombraider, Tekken, Ridgeracer, Resident Evil
> etc.
They were great games and sold well. Within a year, sequels
> and clones appeared, only being slightly better than the origianls.
> Nobody cared. They were still great games.
A year after that. the
> sequels has sequels along with several clones. People began to get
> sick of it. there were hundreds of Football and Formula one
> games.
Tombraider sequels/clones were everywhere and it all began
> to lose it's spark.
That's how the playstation got it's
> reputation.
Nintendo release sequels but they tend to only
> release one or two games in a series per console. They wait atleast
> 2 years before releasing a sequel. People have time to forget the
> old game and be nicely surprised by it's sequel.
It's only when a
> new sequel was being released every year to saturate the market,
> things were bad.
Devellopers should leave a 2 year gap atleast
> between a game and it's sequel. When Fifa released it's 3rd
> £40 game in a year, that's when people started to get really
> annoyed...
I agree, games like TR, Ridge Racer and FIFA went too far. Which is why I don't buy these games.
Also, look at the list of PS2 scheduled releases, and you won't find many sequels there! I believe this 'sequels' reputation Sony have is unfair, I mean, TR, FIFA and Ridge all came out on the PC, and the latter 2 came out on N64!
No one makes games like Nintendo. I've also worked out why the PS2 is slated as un original.
About half of the Gamecube releases are sequels, but hardly any of them are sequels to sequels. Let me explain.
At one point, the playstation had a whole load of original games:
Tombraider, Tekken, Ridgeracer, Resident Evil etc.
They were great games and sold well. Within a year, sequels and clones appeared, only being slightly better than the origianls. Nobody cared. They were still great games.
A year after that. the sequels has sequels along with several clones. People began to get sick of it. there were hundreds of Football and Formula one games.
Tombraider sequels/clones were everywhere and it all began to lose it's spark.
That's how the playstation got it's reputation.
Nintendo release sequels but they tend to only release one or two games in a series per console. They wait atleast 2 years before releasing a sequel. People have time to forget the old game and be nicely surprised by it's sequel.
It's only when a new sequel was being released every year to saturate the market, things were bad.
Devellopers should leave a 2 year gap atleast between a game and it's sequel. When Fifa released it's 3rd £40 game in a year, that's when people started to get really annoyed...
About half of the Gamecube releases are sequels, but hardly any of them are sequels to sequels. Let me explain.
At one point, the playstation had a whole load of original games:
Tombraider, Tekken, Ridgeracer, Resident Evil etc.
They were great games and sold well. Within a year, sequels and clones appeared, only being slightly better than the origianls. Nobody cared. They were still great games.
A year after that. the sequels has sequels along with several clones. People began to get sick of it. there were hundreds of Football and Formula one games.
Tombraider sequels/clones were everywhere and it all began to lose it's spark.
That's how the playstation got it's reputation.
Nintendo release sequels but they tend to only release one or two games in a series per console. They wait atleast 2 years before releasing a sequel. People have time to forget the old game and be nicely surprised by it's sequel.
It's only when a new sequel was being released every year to saturate the market, things were bad.
Devellopers should leave a 2 year gap atleast between a game and it's sequel. When Fifa released it's 3rd £40 game in a year, that's when people started to get really annoyed...
I love lylat wars... the proble is that it's so easy! When starfox first came out on the SNES it was something so revolutionary that it was brilliance! But with Lylat wars, an update was not enough. Imagine if they had a full3d adventure with loads of levels, great story, and more options like a proper multiplayer... come on Nintendo! Is 2 player dog fighting the best u can do?
I am sooo lokking forwards to Starfox Adventure- dinosaure planet!
Sonic
I am sooo lokking forwards to Starfox Adventure- dinosaure planet!
Sonic
Meka_Dragon: Joining The Game and Grix in the Hype The Gamecube Petition!
(There ain't really a petition but there should be....)
I really think Starfox adventures will be one of the best games yet...okay so the floating asteroids are nothing new, but take those excellent screenshots from DP, add them to a landscape in SFA (Cool Abbreviation!) And viola, look at the graphics.....the one thing we need to talk about is the graphics.....cause hey, this IS Nintendo we're talking about...'Where great gameplay comes...as standard!'
I Thank You.
...Game
(There ain't really a petition but there should be....)
I really think Starfox adventures will be one of the best games yet...okay so the floating asteroids are nothing new, but take those excellent screenshots from DP, add them to a landscape in SFA (Cool Abbreviation!) And viola, look at the graphics.....the one thing we need to talk about is the graphics.....cause hey, this IS Nintendo we're talking about...'Where great gameplay comes...as standard!'
I Thank You.
...Game
They used me.
They used me and spat me out like a dog chew.
I dont mind paying that amount, but for any game to end in any way whatsover in under an hour, with no continues needed is absolutely shocking.
I know I keep banging on about this game, but I was furious this happened.
Nevermind replaying to get medals, what is anyone doing completing a game that fast, in one sitting, not dying once?
I sold my Nintendo 2 days later with 9 games for £100 just to get rid of it.
So there
*sticks tongue out at everyone*
They used me and spat me out like a dog chew.
I dont mind paying that amount, but for any game to end in any way whatsover in under an hour, with no continues needed is absolutely shocking.
I know I keep banging on about this game, but I was furious this happened.
Nevermind replaying to get medals, what is anyone doing completing a game that fast, in one sitting, not dying once?
I sold my Nintendo 2 days later with 9 games for £100 just to get rid of it.
So there
*sticks tongue out at everyone*
I don't know hey!
Different tastes I guess, and looking for different things from the game.
I enjoyed Lylat Wars. Honest.
Yes it was relatively easy to take the simple path to the end of the game, but I had fun trying to get enough hits so that I could take the more difficult path to the end, over different levels.
I've found many Nintendo games are like this to appeal to a wider range of ages. They have a simply way of finishing the game, and extra challenges. It's like you could finish Super Nario64 with 70 stars, but it was fun playing the other levels to try to get all 120.
I think it was fun trying to finish Lylat Wars down the difficult path to see the other endings, and trying to earn all of the medals.
Different tastes I guess, and looking for different things from the game.
I enjoyed Lylat Wars. Honest.
Yes it was relatively easy to take the simple path to the end of the game, but I had fun trying to get enough hits so that I could take the more difficult path to the end, over different levels.
I've found many Nintendo games are like this to appeal to a wider range of ages. They have a simply way of finishing the game, and extra challenges. It's like you could finish Super Nario64 with 70 stars, but it was fun playing the other levels to try to get all 120.
I think it was fun trying to finish Lylat Wars down the difficult path to see the other endings, and trying to earn all of the medals.
Page: