The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Many years ago now a stupid stuck up company messed around with a CD giant, a giant that wanted a piece of the gaming market. Because of this said CD giant murdered the market, SEGA fell and Nintendo were forced to retreat from their headlined position. Sony was here.
Nintendo's survival depended on three things, their unique, totally different style to Sony meant Nintendo offered something Sony didn't. Nintendo also have the hardest dying fan base you'll ever see, a fan base filled with us lot. These two factors help but it was the Gameboy, a franchise left untouched by Sony's rampage that meant Nintendo could re-group and re-build.
Nintendo hid in their niche market, their fan base and their Gameboy franchise allowed them to soldier on as Sony's user-base tripled, quadrupled and whatever came after that. Could anyone stop this jugganaught?
Enter Microsoft. The biggest, richest company in the entire world... and all of a sudden Sony didn't look that strong. Microsoft has slowly chipped away at Sony over the past 2 years, eating more and more into both their and Nintendo's user base. Microsoft are a company that, no matter how hard they try, Sony cannot defeat even in their elevated position.
There is no room for 3 consoles, it is time for Sony to finish off Nintendo once and for all.
And this was the perfect time to do it. Despite unbelievable sales of the Gameboy Advance the Gamecube was falling. Nintendo's die hard fan based were annoyed, the company they loved so much was fiddling with franchises and ultimately creating games that were not up to the usual standard. Wind Waker, Sunshine and Pikmin... the Gamecube's self-proclaimed lead titles were, to some Nintendo fans, disappointing. Only Mario Kart and Metroid Prime proved that Nintendo did indeed still have it. The sale of Rare to Microsoft was another massive blow to Nintendo's fan base, the constant loss of third party developers every week made Nintendo appear doomed to failure.
Enter the death nail, the killer blow.... The PSP.
If Sony want to fight Microsoft then a handheld is the key. A platform that is said to be the future of gaming, a handheld would not only extend the already strong Playstation userbase but also cripple Nintendo beyond repair. Getting a massive head start over Nintendo's next Gameboy, introducing MP3 playability and what looks set to be the sexiest piece of kit ever created.
E3 2004
How Sony didn't expect this. Suddenly everything changed. Nintendo's third parties may be leaving but what at first seemed like a weak first party line up became stronger than ever. The die-hard Nintendo fans were happy with a line up that featured a brand spanking new realistic Zelda game, a fantastic looking Metroid Prime and what is set to be the best Resident Evil title ever made. With Mario Tennis, Donkey Kong, Geist, Starfox, Pikmin 2 and Paper Mario 2 all on the release list it was safe to say Nintendo have protected their die-hard assets.
Nintendo will also launch the next Gameboy before the end of the year.... sorry I mean the 'DS' before the end of the year... undercutting Sony. The DS may not look as cool as the PSP but for pure functionality the system is cool. The games looked gorgeous, the new way of holding games is fantastic and backward compatible with the GBA. Brilliant.
The PSP is launching with GT, Tekken and Metal Gear Solid. Despite those 3 games being some of the biggest in the world their popularity (a bit like Mario's) have taken a knock after their dissapointing latest outings. The PSP also needs to implement a jog proof system for the CD based hardware, a laser as well as an inbuilt memory. Could battery life be a problem? Yes the Playstation name sells, but can Sony sell a handheld console to an adult market? I won't underestimate them, they can do it but there is no way they can have as many PSP gamers as they have PS2 gamers... handheld gaming just is not popular with the adult gamers. Just look at the N-Gage. The DS is launching with Mario’s, Metroid and even Sony’s own Final Fantasy. It is also launching with Nintendo’s first full online mode, boasting touch screen, Wireless connection, a protected clam shape and an in-built microphone. Not all of that may appeal to the casual gamer. But some of it will.
Confessingly the Playstation Pocket looks more dangerous than I originally thought. It looks utterly stunning, lacks clutter (something the DS suffers from) with a beautiful screen. This alone could sell the system... but with the GBA SP set for a large price cut before the end of the year can the PSP defeat Nintendo’s massive, 95%, handheld empire?
If Nintendo are going down they are not doing it without a fight. If Sony’s PSP is forced out by the Gameboy, a system that has forced out many of Nintendo's competitors before, what can Sony do to stop Microsoft?
Dringo.
Nintendo's survival depended on three things, their unique, totally different style to Sony meant Nintendo offered something Sony didn't. Nintendo also have the hardest dying fan base you'll ever see, a fan base filled with us lot. These two factors help but it was the Gameboy, a franchise left untouched by Sony's rampage that meant Nintendo could re-group and re-build.
Nintendo hid in their niche market, their fan base and their Gameboy franchise allowed them to soldier on as Sony's user-base tripled, quadrupled and whatever came after that. Could anyone stop this jugganaught?
Enter Microsoft. The biggest, richest company in the entire world... and all of a sudden Sony didn't look that strong. Microsoft has slowly chipped away at Sony over the past 2 years, eating more and more into both their and Nintendo's user base. Microsoft are a company that, no matter how hard they try, Sony cannot defeat even in their elevated position.
There is no room for 3 consoles, it is time for Sony to finish off Nintendo once and for all.
And this was the perfect time to do it. Despite unbelievable sales of the Gameboy Advance the Gamecube was falling. Nintendo's die hard fan based were annoyed, the company they loved so much was fiddling with franchises and ultimately creating games that were not up to the usual standard. Wind Waker, Sunshine and Pikmin... the Gamecube's self-proclaimed lead titles were, to some Nintendo fans, disappointing. Only Mario Kart and Metroid Prime proved that Nintendo did indeed still have it. The sale of Rare to Microsoft was another massive blow to Nintendo's fan base, the constant loss of third party developers every week made Nintendo appear doomed to failure.
Enter the death nail, the killer blow.... The PSP.
If Sony want to fight Microsoft then a handheld is the key. A platform that is said to be the future of gaming, a handheld would not only extend the already strong Playstation userbase but also cripple Nintendo beyond repair. Getting a massive head start over Nintendo's next Gameboy, introducing MP3 playability and what looks set to be the sexiest piece of kit ever created.
E3 2004
How Sony didn't expect this. Suddenly everything changed. Nintendo's third parties may be leaving but what at first seemed like a weak first party line up became stronger than ever. The die-hard Nintendo fans were happy with a line up that featured a brand spanking new realistic Zelda game, a fantastic looking Metroid Prime and what is set to be the best Resident Evil title ever made. With Mario Tennis, Donkey Kong, Geist, Starfox, Pikmin 2 and Paper Mario 2 all on the release list it was safe to say Nintendo have protected their die-hard assets.
Nintendo will also launch the next Gameboy before the end of the year.... sorry I mean the 'DS' before the end of the year... undercutting Sony. The DS may not look as cool as the PSP but for pure functionality the system is cool. The games looked gorgeous, the new way of holding games is fantastic and backward compatible with the GBA. Brilliant.
The PSP is launching with GT, Tekken and Metal Gear Solid. Despite those 3 games being some of the biggest in the world their popularity (a bit like Mario's) have taken a knock after their dissapointing latest outings. The PSP also needs to implement a jog proof system for the CD based hardware, a laser as well as an inbuilt memory. Could battery life be a problem? Yes the Playstation name sells, but can Sony sell a handheld console to an adult market? I won't underestimate them, they can do it but there is no way they can have as many PSP gamers as they have PS2 gamers... handheld gaming just is not popular with the adult gamers. Just look at the N-Gage. The DS is launching with Mario’s, Metroid and even Sony’s own Final Fantasy. It is also launching with Nintendo’s first full online mode, boasting touch screen, Wireless connection, a protected clam shape and an in-built microphone. Not all of that may appeal to the casual gamer. But some of it will.
Confessingly the Playstation Pocket looks more dangerous than I originally thought. It looks utterly stunning, lacks clutter (something the DS suffers from) with a beautiful screen. This alone could sell the system... but with the GBA SP set for a large price cut before the end of the year can the PSP defeat Nintendo’s massive, 95%, handheld empire?
If Nintendo are going down they are not doing it without a fight. If Sony’s PSP is forced out by the Gameboy, a system that has forced out many of Nintendo's competitors before, what can Sony do to stop Microsoft?
Dringo.
Page:
Goldeneye was incredibly innovative.
AND, you could go outside and indoors in that, too.
AND, you could go outside and indoors in that, too.
Well, looks like Halo isn't all that innovative either :D
So we're stuck with the fact that it's a damn fine game to play :D
Some people wont like it, most of them will be people who don't own it and haven't really dedicated any time to playing it through on different difficulty levels.
So we're stuck with the fact that it's a damn fine game to play :D
Some people wont like it, most of them will be people who don't own it and haven't really dedicated any time to playing it through on different difficulty levels.
Innovation isn't always a good thing.
Look at the Virtual boy.
Look at the Virtual boy.
The weapons limitation system was present in Counter Strike, and most tactical squad based shooters, including the original Rainbow Six. I'm not sure about the timings, but I know that regeneration of health is present in Jedi Knight for the PC, and I think that it came out before Halo.
I wouldn't really call the move from indoor to outdoor an innovation, as it was really more an allowance of the hardware, and something that would have been done before if it was possible. And you could also go outside and inside on Turok 2 on the 64, although the scale wasn't quite as large as the Xbox, it was a seamless transition.
Again, I'm not sure of the timings, but Operation Flashpoint had a clearly defined AI rank system, although you may discount that if you want, because it's not a traditional formula FPS (although it can beplayed in First Person and it is an army game), and it's really more of a squad based game.
I wouldn't really call the move from indoor to outdoor an innovation, as it was really more an allowance of the hardware, and something that would have been done before if it was possible. And you could also go outside and inside on Turok 2 on the 64, although the scale wasn't quite as large as the Xbox, it was a seamless transition.
Again, I'm not sure of the timings, but Operation Flashpoint had a clearly defined AI rank system, although you may discount that if you want, because it's not a traditional formula FPS (although it can beplayed in First Person and it is an army game), and it's really more of a squad based game.
I love Halo. I've completed it on legendary, normal, easy and some of heroic (just skipped for Legendary). I have no problems with the game, but it's about 12.6676 times better in co-op.
mattributé wrote:
> So, if Halo was based on a movie, would it be any worse?
No, that's not the point I was making with Goldeneye either. You have taken what I said out of context. Someone else said it was innovative, I was merely pointing out that it had no liberties with the storyline.
Doesn't make it any worse of a game, doesn't make it any less important for it's generation of hardware. The game wasn't really taken on the merits of the story, might have beenm to do with the Goldeneye license. Just look at Perfect Dark, much more emphasis was placed on the story of the game, because Rare were actually driving tht story, not following a strict template.
> So, if Halo was based on a movie, would it be any worse?
No, that's not the point I was making with Goldeneye either. You have taken what I said out of context. Someone else said it was innovative, I was merely pointing out that it had no liberties with the storyline.
Doesn't make it any worse of a game, doesn't make it any less important for it's generation of hardware. The game wasn't really taken on the merits of the story, might have beenm to do with the Goldeneye license. Just look at Perfect Dark, much more emphasis was placed on the story of the game, because Rare were actually driving tht story, not following a strict template.
Only carrying two weapons at once and not a whole armoury was an innovation in Halo.
Having a regenerating shield was an innovation in Halo.
Vehicles have already been pointed out.
AI with clear unit ranking system, might have been done before, but I'd neevr seen it in a game where the actual ranks attack in waves and have different levels of duties.
The enemy weaponary was innovative too.
The storyline, just as many twists as a decent Holywood film.
The integration of indoor and outdoor environments in a single level, and I'm not just talking about single room buildings, or areas of low geometry. This game actually had massively structured outdoor and indoor environments in a single level. People here might not understand the technical achievement that is, but it was a massive step to be able to move seamlessly from one to the other, and not just simple architeture, I must stress that before someone attacks that point, I can see it happening, if you don't know the difference between rendering a terrain or an indoor environment in a game, please don't attack this point.
Having a regenerating shield was an innovation in Halo.
Vehicles have already been pointed out.
AI with clear unit ranking system, might have been done before, but I'd neevr seen it in a game where the actual ranks attack in waves and have different levels of duties.
The enemy weaponary was innovative too.
The storyline, just as many twists as a decent Holywood film.
The integration of indoor and outdoor environments in a single level, and I'm not just talking about single room buildings, or areas of low geometry. This game actually had massively structured outdoor and indoor environments in a single level. People here might not understand the technical achievement that is, but it was a massive step to be able to move seamlessly from one to the other, and not just simple architeture, I must stress that before someone attacks that point, I can see it happening, if you don't know the difference between rendering a terrain or an indoor environment in a game, please don't attack this point.
So, if Halo was based on a movie, would it be any worse?
mattributé wrote:
> You 'slate' Goldeneye for it, then praise Halo for taking inspiration
> from Hollywood.
>
> Double Standards, m'boy
No, I'm not even reomtely slating Goldeneye. Not once have I said Goldeneye was a bad game, just pointing out that it wasn't the most original title ever made. The story in Halo is unlike any game or film I've ever seen or played before.
Having a story based entriely on the actions of a film, and taking design briefs from the top Sci Fi films isn't exatly the same thing either.
A little thought wouldn't have gone a miss before you opened up to that wonderful statement.
> You 'slate' Goldeneye for it, then praise Halo for taking inspiration
> from Hollywood.
>
> Double Standards, m'boy
No, I'm not even reomtely slating Goldeneye. Not once have I said Goldeneye was a bad game, just pointing out that it wasn't the most original title ever made. The story in Halo is unlike any game or film I've ever seen or played before.
Having a story based entriely on the actions of a film, and taking design briefs from the top Sci Fi films isn't exatly the same thing either.
A little thought wouldn't have gone a miss before you opened up to that wonderful statement.
Halo was a case of using all the best features from other games.
In co-op, that game more than makes up for the lack of innovation
In co-op, that game more than makes up for the lack of innovation
Page: