The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Why is it, that we seem to always crave for something new?! Despite just getting 'Soul Calibur' for my Dreamcast, already I want something more, something bigger, something new...
Maybe it is the genre...fighting games have never really had the same one-player significance that we have through platformers and RPG's like Banjo and Skies of Arcadia...But on the other hand...Soul Calibur is regarded as one of the best and most innovative fighting games of all time with almost limitless modes including a one-player 'Mission Battle' mode where you can indulge in numerous stories revolving around your character and other tales about certain locations.
I can't seem to come to a conclusion...even non-fighting games like Banjo-Tooie have taken second places to the Pokémon games my brother plays...I just don't understand...
Maybe classics aren't 'classics' anymore....long gone are the days of the 2D mario that brought so much pleasure to gamers hearts....young and old alike...the gameplay could be fast and furious or slow...and peaceful...the balance between all the aspects of the games was, dare I say it, perfect....It wasn't just Mario, Sonic was the same...F Zero, Secret Of Mana...a very large number of old games...could provide hours upon hours upon hours of seemingly limitless, quality gameplay. Now graphics seem to have taken centre-stage.
I think that the main reason why we crave for so much more is because games nowadays aren't as satisfying as they were 'then'. Our demands as gamers have changed...we don't want another 'save the princess - defeat the evil dragon' fairytale...we want blood, horror and drama...action, adventure and suspense. It is a good job Nintendo jumped ship when they did...if they have blitzed E3 with Mario 128 some may have been amazed BUT the vast amount of casual gamers would have looked to Sony for the next Resident Evil...or the next Metal Gear... Customer demands are changing...in a world of Shenmue and Halo, there is no room for games that don't excite...and that is why I think we always crave for something new....
And hey, it isn't just software...look at the Game Boy Advance...It is about the same price as the Dreamcast yet....Shock Horror, I bet Nintendo sell about 4 times as many GBA's as Sega do Dreamcasts...if not more...the GBA games will be about the same price as a DC title...any 'man' in their right state of mind would pick Sonic 2 over Rayman Advance....but the chances are...people will be trading in their Dreamcasts to get a GBA half price...it is sad I know....but it's thr truth...public image means more now that it ever has...most children must have craved for an N64 but if Gazza, Bazza and Fred sneered at it and jumped for a Playstation why would little Johnny be any different....?!
With production of games taking much longer(on average taking into account the X-Box, Gamecube and PS2) developers will struggle to keep up...It can take 3 years to develop a games that can be completed in 3 days....a friend of mine completed Shenmue in 9 hours!
We all wan't csomething new...if we are all honest about it NONE of us would turn away a free PS2...maybe because we'd look cool by having one....maybe because it'd save us all about £400 to get a decent set-up...but overall, I think it is because we wan't something new...the PS2 is the newest console out...the games, although not yet revolutionary in all areas will be soon and the title numbers are on the increase.....
Think about it...what would you buy for £130? A Dreamcast with Sonic Adventure 1&2, Chu Chu Rocket and a pad...
...or...
...a GBA with Tony Hawks and a free battery pack...
Most of us would say the latter...the GBA is a new, revoulutionary masterpiece with a good future, the Dreamcast?...I dying 'should have been' about to go out with a bang?!
We'll always want newer stuff....our generation seems to have rebuked the necessities that are history, heritage and tradition and ran for the glitzy packaging...I'd be very surprised if there was a GBA game at release that could compare to the 'brilliance' of Mario Bros 3...I really would...
Graphics are ALWAYS the first thing gamers look at....just as looks are the first thing a lad looks at when on the prowl for a lady-friend...
It's just the way things are...the future may look bright from where you're standing but if we continually want more games with new genres at a quicker rate surely this says something about the quality of the games...
Surely....
Maybe it is the genre...fighting games have never really had the same one-player significance that we have through platformers and RPG's like Banjo and Skies of Arcadia...But on the other hand...Soul Calibur is regarded as one of the best and most innovative fighting games of all time with almost limitless modes including a one-player 'Mission Battle' mode where you can indulge in numerous stories revolving around your character and other tales about certain locations.
I can't seem to come to a conclusion...even non-fighting games like Banjo-Tooie have taken second places to the Pokémon games my brother plays...I just don't understand...
Maybe classics aren't 'classics' anymore....long gone are the days of the 2D mario that brought so much pleasure to gamers hearts....young and old alike...the gameplay could be fast and furious or slow...and peaceful...the balance between all the aspects of the games was, dare I say it, perfect....It wasn't just Mario, Sonic was the same...F Zero, Secret Of Mana...a very large number of old games...could provide hours upon hours upon hours of seemingly limitless, quality gameplay. Now graphics seem to have taken centre-stage.
I think that the main reason why we crave for so much more is because games nowadays aren't as satisfying as they were 'then'. Our demands as gamers have changed...we don't want another 'save the princess - defeat the evil dragon' fairytale...we want blood, horror and drama...action, adventure and suspense. It is a good job Nintendo jumped ship when they did...if they have blitzed E3 with Mario 128 some may have been amazed BUT the vast amount of casual gamers would have looked to Sony for the next Resident Evil...or the next Metal Gear... Customer demands are changing...in a world of Shenmue and Halo, there is no room for games that don't excite...and that is why I think we always crave for something new....
And hey, it isn't just software...look at the Game Boy Advance...It is about the same price as the Dreamcast yet....Shock Horror, I bet Nintendo sell about 4 times as many GBA's as Sega do Dreamcasts...if not more...the GBA games will be about the same price as a DC title...any 'man' in their right state of mind would pick Sonic 2 over Rayman Advance....but the chances are...people will be trading in their Dreamcasts to get a GBA half price...it is sad I know....but it's thr truth...public image means more now that it ever has...most children must have craved for an N64 but if Gazza, Bazza and Fred sneered at it and jumped for a Playstation why would little Johnny be any different....?!
With production of games taking much longer(on average taking into account the X-Box, Gamecube and PS2) developers will struggle to keep up...It can take 3 years to develop a games that can be completed in 3 days....a friend of mine completed Shenmue in 9 hours!
We all wan't csomething new...if we are all honest about it NONE of us would turn away a free PS2...maybe because we'd look cool by having one....maybe because it'd save us all about £400 to get a decent set-up...but overall, I think it is because we wan't something new...the PS2 is the newest console out...the games, although not yet revolutionary in all areas will be soon and the title numbers are on the increase.....
Think about it...what would you buy for £130? A Dreamcast with Sonic Adventure 1&2, Chu Chu Rocket and a pad...
...or...
...a GBA with Tony Hawks and a free battery pack...
Most of us would say the latter...the GBA is a new, revoulutionary masterpiece with a good future, the Dreamcast?...I dying 'should have been' about to go out with a bang?!
We'll always want newer stuff....our generation seems to have rebuked the necessities that are history, heritage and tradition and ran for the glitzy packaging...I'd be very surprised if there was a GBA game at release that could compare to the 'brilliance' of Mario Bros 3...I really would...
Graphics are ALWAYS the first thing gamers look at....just as looks are the first thing a lad looks at when on the prowl for a lady-friend...
It's just the way things are...the future may look bright from where you're standing but if we continually want more games with new genres at a quicker rate surely this says something about the quality of the games...
Surely....
Page:
I definitely don't agree with that 18 month theory...graphics aren't advancing as fast as we think...
Remember back when Mario 64 was first shown?! The graphics were way better than they are in the game, probably cause they were running on a PC...
Starfox for the Gamecube was running from a PC, so although the Gamecube can produce excellent graphics through the flipper chip they won't be as good as they were on the PC @ E3 2001!
Nintendo still 'have it' but don't expect the Gamecube to break ground graphically...gameplay-wise almost definitely but grphically, once you're playing the Game they will only be as good as any PS2 game.
Game
Remember back when Mario 64 was first shown?! The graphics were way better than they are in the game, probably cause they were running on a PC...
Starfox for the Gamecube was running from a PC, so although the Gamecube can produce excellent graphics through the flipper chip they won't be as good as they were on the PC @ E3 2001!
Nintendo still 'have it' but don't expect the Gamecube to break ground graphically...gameplay-wise almost definitely but grphically, once you're playing the Game they will only be as good as any PS2 game.
Game
adrian wrote:
I was watching Game Lab on .TV and the bloke said that in
> about 18 months time computer games will have graphics that will
> compare to the computer animated movies of Toy Story 2 and Final
> Fantasy Movie.
Aye... He was talking a lot of rubbish then huh? :)
I dont think the current (PS2//X-Box/GC) consoles will be capible of that level of in game/hi-framerate gameplay... and since in 18 months they will still be going strong... its a good bet that that wont happen...
Maybe next gen huh?
:)
I was watching Game Lab on .TV and the bloke said that in
> about 18 months time computer games will have graphics that will
> compare to the computer animated movies of Toy Story 2 and Final
> Fantasy Movie.
Aye... He was talking a lot of rubbish then huh? :)
I dont think the current (PS2//X-Box/GC) consoles will be capible of that level of in game/hi-framerate gameplay... and since in 18 months they will still be going strong... its a good bet that that wont happen...
Maybe next gen huh?
:)
PieroGas wrote:
I think that the only
> real advancements that can be made are in the graphical department -
> we will continue to demand newer, better games until the hardware is
> capable of TV/film quality graphics. When that happens we will only
> seek the equivalent standard in gameplay and variety to suit all
> tastes.
I was watching Game Lab on .TV and the bloke said that in about 18 months time computer games will have graphics that will compare to the computer animated movies of Toy Story 2 and Final Fantasy Movie.
I think that the only
> real advancements that can be made are in the graphical department -
> we will continue to demand newer, better games until the hardware is
> capable of TV/film quality graphics. When that happens we will only
> seek the equivalent standard in gameplay and variety to suit all
> tastes.
I was watching Game Lab on .TV and the bloke said that in about 18 months time computer games will have graphics that will compare to the computer animated movies of Toy Story 2 and Final Fantasy Movie.
This is like the 'console wars' discussions. There isn't really an answer, only different points of view.
Everyone will have their own idea of what deserves 'classic' status. I went on a different thread earlier saying how good playing the SNES is now and again (Mario All Stars, Mario Kart etc).
But it goes back to the point that there are so many different elements in a game that can appeal, and everyone has their own preference about what will appeal in a game.
When I won GAD the other week, I opted for World Championship Snooker on PS2 - not for the graphics or gameplay, just because I am a big fan of the sport.
I also own No Mercy on the N64, but not because I am a fan of the sport (a load of fake rubbish), but because I just wanted something a bit different to the other games in my collection (and it had good reviews).
Each to their own and all that.
Everyone will have their own idea of what deserves 'classic' status. I went on a different thread earlier saying how good playing the SNES is now and again (Mario All Stars, Mario Kart etc).
But it goes back to the point that there are so many different elements in a game that can appeal, and everyone has their own preference about what will appeal in a game.
When I won GAD the other week, I opted for World Championship Snooker on PS2 - not for the graphics or gameplay, just because I am a big fan of the sport.
I also own No Mercy on the N64, but not because I am a fan of the sport (a load of fake rubbish), but because I just wanted something a bit different to the other games in my collection (and it had good reviews).
Each to their own and all that.
The Game wrote:
"Graphics Smaphics...You can't beat the classics!" - Game
*******************
I like that, I think i'll use it as my new slogan thingy...:D
Game
"Graphics Smaphics...You can't beat the classics!" - Game
*******************
I like that, I think i'll use it as my new slogan thingy...:D
Game
RastaBillySkank wrote:
> Good point Piero but then you look at Superman 64, which a DREADFUL
> game. The graphcis were good but it got nothing but terrible
> reviews. Then in next months chart it was in at number 4!!! What the
> hell?!
Just some N64 owners wanting a new game for the system. If my memory serves me well it was released before being reviewed (always beware of these games). I waited, saw the review, and didn't buy it.
> Good point Piero but then you look at Superman 64, which a DREADFUL
> game. The graphcis were good but it got nothing but terrible
> reviews. Then in next months chart it was in at number 4!!! What the
> hell?!
Just some N64 owners wanting a new game for the system. If my memory serves me well it was released before being reviewed (always beware of these games). I waited, saw the review, and didn't buy it.
PieroGas wrote:
> Only following your comparison.
Seriously though, no-one in their
> right mind buys a game without seeing a review first. Graphics don't
> pull you towards a game - the reviews do - otherwise Tetris wouldn't
> have sold a copy. The hype can get people thinking about a game, but
> it won't sell without the good review.
**************************
Graphics on the Gameboy don't really count and they weren't really a major factor in the consoles selling points and hey, the Game Gear had better graphics!....
But if we take the N64 which had both good graphics and gameplay, look at Perfect Dark...the storyline is nowhere near as good as Bond, or even MGS, BUT it sold, maybe because of the female lead character but I think that it was the graphics and looks of the game that sold a large number of units!
But with Rare games you tend to get both!...:D
Graphics are the first thing you see then you look at a game...you don't automatically download the information to your brain, You may not ultimately buy the game for the graphics but they are what give you the first impressions! And they do sell alot of games!
Whenever a company releases shots of a new game, because little is know about the game, people automatically rate the game through screen shots...(Kinami - MGS2) I am noit saying it isn't a good game, but it is a prime example!
> Only following your comparison.
Seriously though, no-one in their
> right mind buys a game without seeing a review first. Graphics don't
> pull you towards a game - the reviews do - otherwise Tetris wouldn't
> have sold a copy. The hype can get people thinking about a game, but
> it won't sell without the good review.
**************************
Graphics on the Gameboy don't really count and they weren't really a major factor in the consoles selling points and hey, the Game Gear had better graphics!....
But if we take the N64 which had both good graphics and gameplay, look at Perfect Dark...the storyline is nowhere near as good as Bond, or even MGS, BUT it sold, maybe because of the female lead character but I think that it was the graphics and looks of the game that sold a large number of units!
But with Rare games you tend to get both!...:D
Graphics are the first thing you see then you look at a game...you don't automatically download the information to your brain, You may not ultimately buy the game for the graphics but they are what give you the first impressions! And they do sell alot of games!
Whenever a company releases shots of a new game, because little is know about the game, people automatically rate the game through screen shots...(Kinami - MGS2) I am noit saying it isn't a good game, but it is a prime example!
I really do hope you win for this Game. Bit ironic too, considering what you were writing about. :0)
Page: