The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
We are now seeing some graphical genius’s in the world of gaming these days and some say that is all they buy there game for but what do people buy there games for? Excellent visuals? Great sound? Or smooth gameplay? Well preferably everyone wants all in his or her game but there is one other thing that you need in it to make it a total success and get the sales up…
Well in my opinion the most important is the lifespan of the game, what keeps you coming back over and over again. Games like sonic keep you busy for about a week until you complete it and don’t know what to do. Sure on this title there are some mini games but they aren’t really going to play them very long are they. Sure riding sonic in a bumper car is fun at first but not for long.
A lot of unsuccessful games aren’t all that bad and usually have some good graphics and smooth action. What they lack in is last ability and once the games is over… it is done, no more to do. They might put in some kind of underachieving multiplayer that only pleases your little brother once and then he even he hates it so you probably sell it 2 weeks later when you admit to your self that it was a serious mis-purchase.
SO what needs to be done so gamers can be entertained for longer than a month at most?? Well I think games need not longer missions but more 1-player multiplayer with a lot of options open to you like in Quake 3 Arena for the DC.
Games like quake 3 have a massive level span which takes ages to complete but who cares when you get a coool multiplayer basically the same as the one player mode which is excellent quality and what every gamer should deserve to spend their hard earned cash on. This keeps you busy; as there is nothing to complete you just have an extreme laugh with it and your mates too.
But do we need a change from this? What I mean is that do we need something fresh like a new mode for each genre. Like for a shoot’ em up should there be a new mode to play on.
Anyway I think in the future companies need to work on what gamers want out of games and not just the usual dull multiplayer that they expect to keep everyone busy.
Cheers
T_W
Well in my opinion the most important is the lifespan of the game, what keeps you coming back over and over again. Games like sonic keep you busy for about a week until you complete it and don’t know what to do. Sure on this title there are some mini games but they aren’t really going to play them very long are they. Sure riding sonic in a bumper car is fun at first but not for long.
A lot of unsuccessful games aren’t all that bad and usually have some good graphics and smooth action. What they lack in is last ability and once the games is over… it is done, no more to do. They might put in some kind of underachieving multiplayer that only pleases your little brother once and then he even he hates it so you probably sell it 2 weeks later when you admit to your self that it was a serious mis-purchase.
SO what needs to be done so gamers can be entertained for longer than a month at most?? Well I think games need not longer missions but more 1-player multiplayer with a lot of options open to you like in Quake 3 Arena for the DC.
Games like quake 3 have a massive level span which takes ages to complete but who cares when you get a coool multiplayer basically the same as the one player mode which is excellent quality and what every gamer should deserve to spend their hard earned cash on. This keeps you busy; as there is nothing to complete you just have an extreme laugh with it and your mates too.
But do we need a change from this? What I mean is that do we need something fresh like a new mode for each genre. Like for a shoot’ em up should there be a new mode to play on.
Anyway I think in the future companies need to work on what gamers want out of games and not just the usual dull multiplayer that they expect to keep everyone busy.
Cheers
T_W
Exactly. Get four people together (especially on that wind up the watsit mini game) and it provides endless fun.
I originally thought I was good at that mini game, getting the little things 35 meters, but then my friend, "Tom the Mentallist" does 38 meters on his first go. :-) He has the most incredible tapping speed. It was just a blur! I think he got over 40 eventually.
I like the 2-P co-op ones as well, like the planes and carts etc...
A whole lot of fun!
I originally thought I was good at that mini game, getting the little things 35 meters, but then my friend, "Tom the Mentallist" does 38 meters on his first go. :-) He has the most incredible tapping speed. It was just a blur! I think he got over 40 eventually.
I like the 2-P co-op ones as well, like the planes and carts etc...
A whole lot of fun!
ssxpro wrote:
Mario Party 2 is one of only three games I really
> enjoyed on N64. (The others were PD and Episode 1: Racer).
Mario Party 2, in my opinion, is one of those games that, if played with friends, cannot fail to entertain.
Mario Party 2 is one of only three games I really
> enjoyed on N64. (The others were PD and Episode 1: Racer).
Mario Party 2, in my opinion, is one of those games that, if played with friends, cannot fail to entertain.
Meka_Dragon wrote:
>one of my
> favourite games just so happens to be Mario Party 2, a game that has
> very little for the single player, but is greatly entertaining with
> friends.
Mario Party 2 is one of only three games I really enjoyed on N64. (The others were PD and Episode 1: Racer).
>one of my
> favourite games just so happens to be Mario Party 2, a game that has
> very little for the single player, but is greatly entertaining with
> friends.
Mario Party 2 is one of only three games I really enjoyed on N64. (The others were PD and Episode 1: Racer).
Some of the most popular games have no real lastability though.
Look at the Zelda series. Yes the quest may take you the best part of a month (longer if you don't get to play that often), but once it's done, it's done. 'Done bun, can't be undone', as a character in the book I'm reading might say.
There's no replay value whatsoever. You may play the game again many months later, but once you've collected all of the items and completed all of the quests, what else is there?
But still, these are amongst the most popular and best selling games of all time.
Why?
It's because people don't look for lastability, or how much replay value the game has, but just how good it will be the first time, and just how involving the game might be.
I don't pick up a game thinking that I can play on the multiplayer for decades, it's just not the initial thought that I have. Yes it's nice, and it's something to do when your friends come over, but it won't sell me the game. What will is a decent quest. An adventure that I can really get into. It can take over my (limited) free time for a few weeks, then I can let it go. That, to me, is the magic of gaming.
That said, one of my favourite games just so happens to be Mario Party 2, a game that has very little for the single player, but is greatly entertaining with friends.
What I think dictates many purchases, is how it will improve my collection of games. I enjoy the 3D adventures like Banjo Tooie and Mario, but I don't fell that I need to own all of them, just a few of the better ones. My collection is more varied, with games I can play to suit the mood I'm in.
For when I want to take my frustration out on something, or I want a bit of a laugh, I play No Mercy. When I want to test my reflexes, I play Battle For Naboo. WHen I want an adventure, I play Banjo Tooie.
So, summing up, it's nice to have games that you can play forever, but it's not my main concern when choosing. I'd rather find a game that I was totally immersed in for a few weeks, than let it go. But it is nice to have some eternally playable games in my collection too.
Look at the Zelda series. Yes the quest may take you the best part of a month (longer if you don't get to play that often), but once it's done, it's done. 'Done bun, can't be undone', as a character in the book I'm reading might say.
There's no replay value whatsoever. You may play the game again many months later, but once you've collected all of the items and completed all of the quests, what else is there?
But still, these are amongst the most popular and best selling games of all time.
Why?
It's because people don't look for lastability, or how much replay value the game has, but just how good it will be the first time, and just how involving the game might be.
I don't pick up a game thinking that I can play on the multiplayer for decades, it's just not the initial thought that I have. Yes it's nice, and it's something to do when your friends come over, but it won't sell me the game. What will is a decent quest. An adventure that I can really get into. It can take over my (limited) free time for a few weeks, then I can let it go. That, to me, is the magic of gaming.
That said, one of my favourite games just so happens to be Mario Party 2, a game that has very little for the single player, but is greatly entertaining with friends.
What I think dictates many purchases, is how it will improve my collection of games. I enjoy the 3D adventures like Banjo Tooie and Mario, but I don't fell that I need to own all of them, just a few of the better ones. My collection is more varied, with games I can play to suit the mood I'm in.
For when I want to take my frustration out on something, or I want a bit of a laugh, I play No Mercy. When I want to test my reflexes, I play Battle For Naboo. WHen I want an adventure, I play Banjo Tooie.
So, summing up, it's nice to have games that you can play forever, but it's not my main concern when choosing. I'd rather find a game that I was totally immersed in for a few weeks, than let it go. But it is nice to have some eternally playable games in my collection too.
I always look for lifespan in games, and I think it's great that the PS2 supports DVDs. It'll take a huge game to fill one of those suckers!!!!!
We are now seeing some graphical genius’s in the world of gaming these days and some say that is all they buy there game for but what do people buy there games for? Excellent visuals? Great sound? Or smooth gameplay? Well preferably everyone wants all in his or her game but there is one other thing that you need in it to make it a total success and get the sales up…
Well in my opinion the most important is the lifespan of the game, what keeps you coming back over and over again. Games like sonic keep you busy for about a week until you complete it and don’t know what to do. Sure on this title there are some mini games but they aren’t really going to play them very long are they. Sure riding sonic in a bumper car is fun at first but not for long.
A lot of unsuccessful games aren’t all that bad and usually have some good graphics and smooth action. What they lack in is last ability and once the games is over… it is done, no more to do. They might put in some kind of underachieving multiplayer that only pleases your little brother once and then he even he hates it so you probably sell it 2 weeks later when you admit to your self that it was a serious mis-purchase.
SO what needs to be done so gamers can be entertained for longer than a month at most?? Well I think games need not longer missions but more 1-player multiplayer with a lot of options open to you like in Quake 3 Arena for the DC.
Games like quake 3 have a massive level span which takes ages to complete but who cares when you get a coool multiplayer basically the same as the one player mode which is excellent quality and what every gamer should deserve to spend their hard earned cash on. This keeps you busy; as there is nothing to complete you just have an extreme laugh with it and your mates too.
But do we need a change from this? What I mean is that do we need something fresh like a new mode for each genre. Like for a shoot’ em up should there be a new mode to play on.
Anyway I think in the future companies need to work on what gamers want out of games and not just the usual dull multiplayer that they expect to keep everyone busy.
Cheers
T_W
Well in my opinion the most important is the lifespan of the game, what keeps you coming back over and over again. Games like sonic keep you busy for about a week until you complete it and don’t know what to do. Sure on this title there are some mini games but they aren’t really going to play them very long are they. Sure riding sonic in a bumper car is fun at first but not for long.
A lot of unsuccessful games aren’t all that bad and usually have some good graphics and smooth action. What they lack in is last ability and once the games is over… it is done, no more to do. They might put in some kind of underachieving multiplayer that only pleases your little brother once and then he even he hates it so you probably sell it 2 weeks later when you admit to your self that it was a serious mis-purchase.
SO what needs to be done so gamers can be entertained for longer than a month at most?? Well I think games need not longer missions but more 1-player multiplayer with a lot of options open to you like in Quake 3 Arena for the DC.
Games like quake 3 have a massive level span which takes ages to complete but who cares when you get a coool multiplayer basically the same as the one player mode which is excellent quality and what every gamer should deserve to spend their hard earned cash on. This keeps you busy; as there is nothing to complete you just have an extreme laugh with it and your mates too.
But do we need a change from this? What I mean is that do we need something fresh like a new mode for each genre. Like for a shoot’ em up should there be a new mode to play on.
Anyway I think in the future companies need to work on what gamers want out of games and not just the usual dull multiplayer that they expect to keep everyone busy.
Cheers
T_W