The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
A lot of people as well as a lot of other sites claim that one day, in the future, gaming will come to an end.
I don’t believe this will happen.
What will replace gaming? What will give people the enjoyment of shooting their friend whilst not actually hurting them? Nothing.
A lot of people say that gaming will come to an end because of lack of originality. This will never happen either. Sure a lot of gaming ideas revolve around each other, but each one is different in it’s own way. Sequels may also count towards ‘lack of originality’, but hey if people didn’t like games being like this then how did the likes of Pokemon Gold/Silver, Final Fantasy, and Zelda MM get to the top? Each one of them has been in some way the same as it predecessor. And that is the reason.
It doesn’t really matter how old an idea is, as long as it a good idea it can be used over and over again, combined with new characters, better graphics and other extra features. This is what FF did and is also what Smash Brothers Melee will do – the idea was good, it generated buyers, the solution: make more of the same.
Games will use this formula until the idea has really been sucked dry, and that takes a long time. If and when that happens a new idea will be thought up, and the chain will continue. So, in 10 years will the likes of GT8, Zelda: (Episode 10) and Quake (12) still be around? Most probably yes.
Agree or disagree?
Swish
I don’t believe this will happen.
What will replace gaming? What will give people the enjoyment of shooting their friend whilst not actually hurting them? Nothing.
A lot of people say that gaming will come to an end because of lack of originality. This will never happen either. Sure a lot of gaming ideas revolve around each other, but each one is different in it’s own way. Sequels may also count towards ‘lack of originality’, but hey if people didn’t like games being like this then how did the likes of Pokemon Gold/Silver, Final Fantasy, and Zelda MM get to the top? Each one of them has been in some way the same as it predecessor. And that is the reason.
It doesn’t really matter how old an idea is, as long as it a good idea it can be used over and over again, combined with new characters, better graphics and other extra features. This is what FF did and is also what Smash Brothers Melee will do – the idea was good, it generated buyers, the solution: make more of the same.
Games will use this formula until the idea has really been sucked dry, and that takes a long time. If and when that happens a new idea will be thought up, and the chain will continue. So, in 10 years will the likes of GT8, Zelda: (Episode 10) and Quake (12) still be around? Most probably yes.
Agree or disagree?
Swish
Page:
A lot of people as well as a lot of other sites claim that one day, in the future, gaming will come to an end.
I don’t believe this will happen.
What will replace gaming? What will give people the enjoyment of shooting their friend whilst not actually hurting them? Nothing.
A lot of people say that gaming will come to an end because of lack of originality. This will never happen either. Sure a lot of gaming ideas revolve around each other, but each one is different in it’s own way. Sequels may also count towards ‘lack of originality’, but hey if people didn’t like games being like this then how did the likes of Pokemon Gold/Silver, Final Fantasy, and Zelda MM get to the top? Each one of them has been in some way the same as it predecessor. And that is the reason.
It doesn’t really matter how old an idea is, as long as it a good idea it can be used over and over again, combined with new characters, better graphics and other extra features. This is what FF did and is also what Smash Brothers Melee will do – the idea was good, it generated buyers, the solution: make more of the same.
Games will use this formula until the idea has really been sucked dry, and that takes a long time. If and when that happens a new idea will be thought up, and the chain will continue. So, in 10 years will the likes of GT8, Zelda: (Episode 10) and Quake (12) still be around? Most probably yes.
Agree or disagree?
Swish
I don’t believe this will happen.
What will replace gaming? What will give people the enjoyment of shooting their friend whilst not actually hurting them? Nothing.
A lot of people say that gaming will come to an end because of lack of originality. This will never happen either. Sure a lot of gaming ideas revolve around each other, but each one is different in it’s own way. Sequels may also count towards ‘lack of originality’, but hey if people didn’t like games being like this then how did the likes of Pokemon Gold/Silver, Final Fantasy, and Zelda MM get to the top? Each one of them has been in some way the same as it predecessor. And that is the reason.
It doesn’t really matter how old an idea is, as long as it a good idea it can be used over and over again, combined with new characters, better graphics and other extra features. This is what FF did and is also what Smash Brothers Melee will do – the idea was good, it generated buyers, the solution: make more of the same.
Games will use this formula until the idea has really been sucked dry, and that takes a long time. If and when that happens a new idea will be thought up, and the chain will continue. So, in 10 years will the likes of GT8, Zelda: (Episode 10) and Quake (12) still be around? Most probably yes.
Agree or disagree?
Swish
OH great bravo another 'original' topic :p
Every classic starts with originality.
It's not neccessarilly how much it sells either.
All the games you've mentioned are big titles.
If they hadn't had predecessors, no one had known what they were going to be like and they'd hit the world by surprise, they would be 10 times bigger.
It doesn't take originality to make a decent game. It does to make a large impact.
It's not neccessarilly how much it sells either.
All the games you've mentioned are big titles.
If they hadn't had predecessors, no one had known what they were going to be like and they'd hit the world by surprise, they would be 10 times bigger.
It doesn't take originality to make a decent game. It does to make a large impact.
Name any classic that made a huge impact on the games industry. The chances are that it was original.
Goldeneye, Worms, Mario 64, Tombraider, Metal Gear Solid, Pokemon Red/Blue, Zelda: Orcarina of Time, etc...
They're all either completely original or in Mario, MGS and Zelda, a step up from 2D to 3D (a huge change in gameplay!).
You can get decent games that aren't original but the classics that make the loudest noise are always the original ones.
Goldeneye, Worms, Mario 64, Tombraider, Metal Gear Solid, Pokemon Red/Blue, Zelda: Orcarina of Time, etc...
They're all either completely original or in Mario, MGS and Zelda, a step up from 2D to 3D (a huge change in gameplay!).
You can get decent games that aren't original but the classics that make the loudest noise are always the original ones.
Quake 3 is one of the most original games of last year, introduced curved surfaces to the 3D world.
you can only go so far with one idea before your customer gets bored of it. You can milk the product dry and risk losing your rep or leave the idea alone for a few years and bring it back at the right time. It all depends on the situation of the market and the company in question.
I think that Ortega has got more or less the right idea.
If I ever make a sequel to a game, I'd probably release it on the next generation of consoles and tell no one about it until the week it's released. That way, it wouldn't get so incredibly hyped up to the point where it's impossible to meet expectations.
If I ever make a sequel to a game, I'd probably release it on the next generation of consoles and tell no one about it until the week it's released. That way, it wouldn't get so incredibly hyped up to the point where it's impossible to meet expectations.
i think the right idea is with the MGS people. Only release the specail game once for each console. i didnt like the idea of two zelda games on the 64. they should have left the zelda name alone until the gamecube. I think Zelda lost some of it edge becasue of that as MM did not really sell too well in this country.
Page: