The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Games developers are faced with very complex specifications to meet for a game to be considered good in the twenty-first century. But is it too much for them? Do we expect too much?
I think we do!
We expect plenty of gameplay, but not without real quality graphics, realistic sound effects in Dolby surround, lots of multiplayer modes, lots of FMV, and lots more which tends to make up the majority of top selling games.
Are all those specifications really neccasary for quality gaming? Will they still be considered neccesary in the future?
Well, not really.
Today, most gamers are able to play on a SNES or Megadrive and play the classic games such as Super Mario Kart and Sonic the Hedgehog. These games have none of the above qualities, other than the first: Gameplay.
In the future, we may be faced with interactive hologram technology where a whole room can simulate an entire world, where you can live you every fantasy, or just simply go on holiday without leaving the home. We wont expect surround sound, FMV or graphics, we'll expect almost real everything! sights, smells, tastes, and even the laws of physics.
Do we really want the above qualities in all of todays games?
No.
Why was the Game Boy Advance an immediate success? Well most people have mentioned Mario Kart Advance a lot. This game is apparantly so popular in the states because it is more like the SNES version! It doesn't have photo quality graphics, but it does have excellent gameplay!
That is one of the reasons Nintendo's handheld series of consoles, Game Boy, has become the worlds best selling console over the years. Nearly all the major games on Game Boy have prioritised gameplay more than any other specification. Gameplay is the core of videogames. Poor gameplay means poor games, no matter what they look like!
Franchises like Tetris, Pokémon, Zelda, Sonic the Hedgehog, Super Mario and even games like Command & Conquer and the original Final Fantasy games have all been successful for concentrating on gameplay.
Right now in the present, developers work way too hard on trying to give gamers FMV, stunning graphics and other features which are really irrelevant to the game just so it gets noticed and bought. You get the odd game which has the right balance between all different specifications, but you're lucky if you've got the right console to play it on!
I would prefer to play a basic 2D game with stunning gameplay than a 3D game with stunning graphics.
I hope people don't take graphics, sound effects, multiplayer modes and all these extras for granted! Games developers work very hard in trying to give you the best gaming experience you'll ever have, and I'm sure it's not easy to do that!
Games developers deserve to have their credits shows at the end of games. They've earnt that right to show themselves in our games as far as I'm concerned.
I think we do!
We expect plenty of gameplay, but not without real quality graphics, realistic sound effects in Dolby surround, lots of multiplayer modes, lots of FMV, and lots more which tends to make up the majority of top selling games.
Are all those specifications really neccasary for quality gaming? Will they still be considered neccesary in the future?
Well, not really.
Today, most gamers are able to play on a SNES or Megadrive and play the classic games such as Super Mario Kart and Sonic the Hedgehog. These games have none of the above qualities, other than the first: Gameplay.
In the future, we may be faced with interactive hologram technology where a whole room can simulate an entire world, where you can live you every fantasy, or just simply go on holiday without leaving the home. We wont expect surround sound, FMV or graphics, we'll expect almost real everything! sights, smells, tastes, and even the laws of physics.
Do we really want the above qualities in all of todays games?
No.
Why was the Game Boy Advance an immediate success? Well most people have mentioned Mario Kart Advance a lot. This game is apparantly so popular in the states because it is more like the SNES version! It doesn't have photo quality graphics, but it does have excellent gameplay!
That is one of the reasons Nintendo's handheld series of consoles, Game Boy, has become the worlds best selling console over the years. Nearly all the major games on Game Boy have prioritised gameplay more than any other specification. Gameplay is the core of videogames. Poor gameplay means poor games, no matter what they look like!
Franchises like Tetris, Pokémon, Zelda, Sonic the Hedgehog, Super Mario and even games like Command & Conquer and the original Final Fantasy games have all been successful for concentrating on gameplay.
Right now in the present, developers work way too hard on trying to give gamers FMV, stunning graphics and other features which are really irrelevant to the game just so it gets noticed and bought. You get the odd game which has the right balance between all different specifications, but you're lucky if you've got the right console to play it on!
I would prefer to play a basic 2D game with stunning gameplay than a 3D game with stunning graphics.
I hope people don't take graphics, sound effects, multiplayer modes and all these extras for granted! Games developers work very hard in trying to give you the best gaming experience you'll ever have, and I'm sure it's not easy to do that!
Games developers deserve to have their credits shows at the end of games. They've earnt that right to show themselves in our games as far as I'm concerned.
Page:
no sound is a very improtant aspect for me in a football game. I am talking about the atmosphere built by the crowd. i play much better with the sound up high than it turned down, and the extra boost of the fans cheering behind me pushes me that little bit extra.
Why? So you can hear where the ball was kicked? That doesn't help the game.
its good for football games also
Yeah, surround is OK for a while but it doesn't really enhance the game much. It's useful in FPSs but apart from that, not much else. A stereo system will suffice.
Yer isn't it cool!!!!!!
you only get that stuff when u have a scart or S-VHS cable. plus os course u need a dolby surround TV. i usually play on my 14" upstairs, but occasionly i treat myself to the world of surround sound downstairs here and there.
Donkey kong, PD, Zelda, Turok 3, Jet force gemini, Banjo tooie, Conker etc... etc...
Tonnes, playing Pd and literally hearing footsteps behind you is great!
Tonnes, playing Pd and literally hearing footsteps behind you is great!
Turbonutter wrote:
> Well, I agree with most things you say but I only know of one game
> in Dolby Surround and I don't think it's a necessasary.
quite a few games on the 64 are in dolby surround. off the top of my head i can remember Perfect Dark and DK64 being in dolby suround. i'm sure there is more though.
> Well, I agree with most things you say but I only know of one game
> in Dolby Surround and I don't think it's a necessasary.
quite a few games on the 64 are in dolby surround. off the top of my head i can remember Perfect Dark and DK64 being in dolby suround. i'm sure there is more though.
Shigsy laugths at other developers as the are constantly trying to ebat eachother.
Whilst Shigsy ahs a laugh jots things down and makes hte best games in the world!
Whilst Shigsy ahs a laugh jots things down and makes hte best games in the world!
I suppose in general we do expect too much from developers, but I think that developers try to out-do each other by making better graphics, more multiplayer modes etc. They also want to push consoles to thier limits to attain an immersive quality in their games.
Another aspect of this arguement is that lots of gamers will look at the back of the box and if they don't see great quality graphics inkeeping with the power of the machine that the game is for they won't buy it.
Just look at successful titles on PSX. Metal Gear Solid, FF8, GT2 etc. They all had good graphics, immersive gameplay and made the developers lots of cash.
Also, from a completely selfish point of view if developers and games retailers expect me to pay £40 for a PS2 game I want great graphics, loads of multiplayer modes etc.
So yeah, I probably do expect too much from developers, but game retailers expect too much - cash - from us.
Another aspect of this arguement is that lots of gamers will look at the back of the box and if they don't see great quality graphics inkeeping with the power of the machine that the game is for they won't buy it.
Just look at successful titles on PSX. Metal Gear Solid, FF8, GT2 etc. They all had good graphics, immersive gameplay and made the developers lots of cash.
Also, from a completely selfish point of view if developers and games retailers expect me to pay £40 for a PS2 game I want great graphics, loads of multiplayer modes etc.
So yeah, I probably do expect too much from developers, but game retailers expect too much - cash - from us.
Page: