The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Remember when we all start out on the forums. We sat there and go "the future of gaming are VR machines". Yeah.... errr no. We know full well that they are just so many many many years away. Even after our life time perhaps.
But Nintendo knew the future is in trouble. Games machines are forever technically going forward. But not for much longer. Games are becoming more photo-realistic, even today's X-box, PS2 and Gamecube are possibly good enough. But the PS3, Xenon and N5 truly will be the final nail in console progressions coffin. So what next?
Well although consoles will struggle to go forward, that isn't strictly the case for handheld gaming.
That's when Sony went, "s**t, Nintendo can actually win this thing!"
You see after the N5 Nintendo can rest on the Gameboy. A franchise that can at last display as good graphics as home formats. The N-Gage and up-coming PSP prove it. With a small connection to the TV and you have a home console/handheld combo. Multiplayer will almost be totally done by online play... Gaming as we know it has changed.
So Sony have to enter the handheld market. Start to knock away some of Nintendo's monopoly. After all there is no guarentee Sony can beat Nintendo again. After all they are ready this time. But have Sony got it wrong?
The PSP is a brilliant piece of kit, MP3 player and video player combo. Genius idea. Plus the £200 price point proves this is an expensive gadget for the adults. Now tell me people, how many adults do you see with Gameboys?
According to Nintendo, with their new plan to see Gameboy to adults (with the SP), a few more than before. But Nintendo will still admitt, the Gameboy sells to children and hardcore gamers. Adults are few and far between. But Sony are different, for starters Playstation is a multi-million selling brand and all these extras are sure to tickle adult gamers fancy. A bit like Nokia, I mean with their brand name and a load of cool extras they would sure make a million selling handheld system...
Oh wait.
Well I'm sure with CD lasers and in built memory to store game data and MP3 abilities will not damage battery life at all. Well maybe, not that it matters I mean battery life doesn't affect the success of a handheld console at all. Just ask SEGA. Oh wait. Well that doesn't matter, it looks so cool with top graphics. They'll get a head start over Nintendo for sure, I mean it's not as if Nintendo plan to launch a handheld system just before the PSP. Oh wait. Well come on, Nintendo haven't learnt anything, I mean the SNES was just as popular as the GAmeboy franchise. Oh wait.
Yes from my standpoint I'm supposed to see it like this. But I'm also a casual consumer, despite the PSP looking hotter than Elisha Cutherbert I can't see a flock of eager people to buy this £200 handheld system. Not even I'd go for it, It's like those PALM computer thingy's, damn they are cool... but there is no way I'd ever get one.
Nintendo are not as stupid as they look. As the Gameboy starts to flag they buy into Pokemon and release a colour edition. Moments before Pokemon started to slide the GBA was launched. As Children became the main consumer of the product Nintendo released an adult edition. The SP. More expensive but damn cooler. Come the PSP launch the SP will suffer a long overdue but very good price cut. The PSP will be facing off against the words most popular console, both the adult SP and the normal childrens edition... at a fraction of the PSP's price.
Not to mention the fact that Nintendo are also getting a head start over the PSP with their own new fangled hand held device the DS. The DS could fail, but the idea could be cool enough to win over gamers hearts.
Sony are not going to walk over Nintendo this time. Nintendo are making sure of it. With a war going on between the DS and PSP for advertisement space you know the GBA will quietly move on by as the biggest selling system still. You just know, like Atari, like SEGA, Like Nokia... Sony could well be the next victim to the handheld massacure. Sure unlike those 3 Sony are a bigger threat. But, Nintendo are actually putting together a defence system this time... they've never done that before.
If the PSP falls will that be the end of the fear that Nintendo will falter? Yes. Nintendo will continue with their handheld dominance, and when and if they are finally forced out of the home console market... the power between the 2 divisions will be so minute... none of us will care.
Dringo - fanboy till the end.
But Nintendo knew the future is in trouble. Games machines are forever technically going forward. But not for much longer. Games are becoming more photo-realistic, even today's X-box, PS2 and Gamecube are possibly good enough. But the PS3, Xenon and N5 truly will be the final nail in console progressions coffin. So what next?
Well although consoles will struggle to go forward, that isn't strictly the case for handheld gaming.
That's when Sony went, "s**t, Nintendo can actually win this thing!"
You see after the N5 Nintendo can rest on the Gameboy. A franchise that can at last display as good graphics as home formats. The N-Gage and up-coming PSP prove it. With a small connection to the TV and you have a home console/handheld combo. Multiplayer will almost be totally done by online play... Gaming as we know it has changed.
So Sony have to enter the handheld market. Start to knock away some of Nintendo's monopoly. After all there is no guarentee Sony can beat Nintendo again. After all they are ready this time. But have Sony got it wrong?
The PSP is a brilliant piece of kit, MP3 player and video player combo. Genius idea. Plus the £200 price point proves this is an expensive gadget for the adults. Now tell me people, how many adults do you see with Gameboys?
According to Nintendo, with their new plan to see Gameboy to adults (with the SP), a few more than before. But Nintendo will still admitt, the Gameboy sells to children and hardcore gamers. Adults are few and far between. But Sony are different, for starters Playstation is a multi-million selling brand and all these extras are sure to tickle adult gamers fancy. A bit like Nokia, I mean with their brand name and a load of cool extras they would sure make a million selling handheld system...
Oh wait.
Well I'm sure with CD lasers and in built memory to store game data and MP3 abilities will not damage battery life at all. Well maybe, not that it matters I mean battery life doesn't affect the success of a handheld console at all. Just ask SEGA. Oh wait. Well that doesn't matter, it looks so cool with top graphics. They'll get a head start over Nintendo for sure, I mean it's not as if Nintendo plan to launch a handheld system just before the PSP. Oh wait. Well come on, Nintendo haven't learnt anything, I mean the SNES was just as popular as the GAmeboy franchise. Oh wait.
Yes from my standpoint I'm supposed to see it like this. But I'm also a casual consumer, despite the PSP looking hotter than Elisha Cutherbert I can't see a flock of eager people to buy this £200 handheld system. Not even I'd go for it, It's like those PALM computer thingy's, damn they are cool... but there is no way I'd ever get one.
Nintendo are not as stupid as they look. As the Gameboy starts to flag they buy into Pokemon and release a colour edition. Moments before Pokemon started to slide the GBA was launched. As Children became the main consumer of the product Nintendo released an adult edition. The SP. More expensive but damn cooler. Come the PSP launch the SP will suffer a long overdue but very good price cut. The PSP will be facing off against the words most popular console, both the adult SP and the normal childrens edition... at a fraction of the PSP's price.
Not to mention the fact that Nintendo are also getting a head start over the PSP with their own new fangled hand held device the DS. The DS could fail, but the idea could be cool enough to win over gamers hearts.
Sony are not going to walk over Nintendo this time. Nintendo are making sure of it. With a war going on between the DS and PSP for advertisement space you know the GBA will quietly move on by as the biggest selling system still. You just know, like Atari, like SEGA, Like Nokia... Sony could well be the next victim to the handheld massacure. Sure unlike those 3 Sony are a bigger threat. But, Nintendo are actually putting together a defence system this time... they've never done that before.
If the PSP falls will that be the end of the fear that Nintendo will falter? Yes. Nintendo will continue with their handheld dominance, and when and if they are finally forced out of the home console market... the power between the 2 divisions will be so minute... none of us will care.
Dringo - fanboy till the end.
Page:
gerrid wrote:
> ...er, the shooting?
Seeing as it had a Zelda style lock on?
That's shooting for the third person.
> The sense of isolation?
Third person wouldn't have changed that.
> The sense of scale?
Not really. Besides, you could still switch into a first person view to aim, scan and look around when you wanted to, and then back into third person when platforming and fighting.
> Third person would have ruined all of these things. Roll everywhere
> in the morph ball and you'll see what I mean, nothing looks anywhere
> near as impressive as it does when you're looking up at it through
> your visor.
The morph ball had a close camera with no camera controls, so it's probably a bad example. But a decent Lakitu style camera (with ghost features to get around the tight spaces - Dringo knows what I'm on about! ;-)) would be fine.
And if you STILL didn't like it then you COULD play entirely through the first person if you REALLY prefered it that way (they would need both views).
The fact is, although platforming and manauvering was done fairly well in the first person, it was watered down compared to what a third person view could've offered.
> ...er, the shooting?
Seeing as it had a Zelda style lock on?
That's shooting for the third person.
> The sense of isolation?
Third person wouldn't have changed that.
> The sense of scale?
Not really. Besides, you could still switch into a first person view to aim, scan and look around when you wanted to, and then back into third person when platforming and fighting.
> Third person would have ruined all of these things. Roll everywhere
> in the morph ball and you'll see what I mean, nothing looks anywhere
> near as impressive as it does when you're looking up at it through
> your visor.
The morph ball had a close camera with no camera controls, so it's probably a bad example. But a decent Lakitu style camera (with ghost features to get around the tight spaces - Dringo knows what I'm on about! ;-)) would be fine.
And if you STILL didn't like it then you COULD play entirely through the first person if you REALLY prefered it that way (they would need both views).
The fact is, although platforming and manauvering was done fairly well in the first person, it was watered down compared to what a third person view could've offered.
Dringo wrote:
> And I wouldn't change prime for the world.
I told you exactly that ages ago, but you didn't listen. Now you love Prime. Ha! :-)
> And I wouldn't change prime for the world.
I told you exactly that ages ago, but you didn't listen. Now you love Prime. Ha! :-)
Compared to Wind Waker, I think you could easily call it gritty. It would never end up like Devil May Cry, though, just a more faithful reincarnation of the N64 games. In terms of atmsophere, and in some ways storyline, the N64 games were better for the realistic approach.
Of course changing for Wind Waker 2 would be crap, I would have just prefered a more 'Zelda' style in the first place.
Of course changing for Wind Waker 2 would be crap, I would have just prefered a more 'Zelda' style in the first place.
gerrid has a point... in fact 2 points.
Toon Shading works beautifully for Zelda and lives its full comic potential.
And I wouldn't change prime for the world.
Toon Shading works beautifully for Zelda and lives its full comic potential.
And I wouldn't change prime for the world.
Strafio wrote:
> apart from the scanning,
> the ONE thing that worked better in first person.
...er, the shooting? The sense of isolation? The sense of scale?
Third person would have ruined all of these things. Roll everywhere in the morph ball and you'll see what I mean, nothing looks anywhere near as impressive as it does when you're looking up at it through your visor.
> apart from the scanning,
> the ONE thing that worked better in first person.
...er, the shooting? The sense of isolation? The sense of scale?
Third person would have ruined all of these things. Roll everywhere in the morph ball and you'll see what I mean, nothing looks anywhere near as impressive as it does when you're looking up at it through your visor.
Not in a million years would I describe the 64 Zeldas as "gritty".
I think toon-shading suits Zelda just fine, as it makes th game what it ought to be - fun. Sure you don't get scared by Zombies in a shadow temple - and it does lack some of that foreboding atmosphere - but that's what makes it seem so different to OOT in terms of mood.
Personally I think they should stick with the WW engine for the remaining GC game(s), and then change things on the next console. Possibly go for a more adult look, but don't loose the charm of Zelda.
I'm worried that if Zelda goes Spaceworld realistic style, it will just become Devil May Cry 5, or something equally shallow.
I think toon-shading suits Zelda just fine, as it makes th game what it ought to be - fun. Sure you don't get scared by Zombies in a shadow temple - and it does lack some of that foreboding atmosphere - but that's what makes it seem so different to OOT in terms of mood.
Personally I think they should stick with the WW engine for the remaining GC game(s), and then change things on the next console. Possibly go for a more adult look, but don't loose the charm of Zelda.
I'm worried that if Zelda goes Spaceworld realistic style, it will just become Devil May Cry 5, or something equally shallow.
While the Wind Waker graphics engine is stunning, and there's no denying it, I would have rathered see a more realistic approach, because toon shading just doesn't suit Zelda. Anyone who's played Majora's Mask will agree that it had quite an atmosphere in the N64 days, which was highlighted by it's more realistic and gritty graphics. I don't think that the old E3 footage would have worked, but something similar could have given us yet another more adult Zelda title. It's not that there's anything wrong the game itself, but to me atmosphere plays a big part in the gaming experience and it's one of the few things Wind Waker was severely lacking, apart from perhaps in frozen Hyrule, which I must admit remains one of the most awe-inspiring moments gaming has to offer.
As for Mario, it's not FLUDD as such that made it so disappointing, despite that being part of the reason, I just think that Mario was trying to be more like Banjo, something that it isn't. Not in style of play or presentation, but Banjo was an adventure game and Mario 64 was a platforming game, despite their similarities, they were worlds apart in terms of play. But Sunshine, like many other so-called 3D platformers, turned into more of an adventure game than anything, bar the mini game sections that excluded FLUDD. It was original, it was fun, but was it Mario? No, it was this new adventuring star that no one had heard of, let's just called him Marino for now. Marino wanted to collect blue coins, search worlds for Shine Sprites and adventure. Even though the set up of collecting shines was very similar to stars in Mario 64, gameplay itself is worlds apart.
Mario just wanted to get to his star and retrieve it, no aimless searching for blue coins and other randomly placed shines. The levels were linear in that you could just go to where you wanted, get the star and go away (even though there were vast amounts to explore), but having the choice to go on multiple different levels to gain stars made it all the better. Mario 64 was about acrobatics and skillfully making your way to the top of some mountain, or to a bomb-shaped boss of some sort. Sunshine was an adventure game with jumping as a mere obstacle, that was made easy with FLUDD. In no way did it heighten the platforming experience, it destroyed it, which is something Marino shouldn't have done.
The closest we've got, in my opinion, to a faithfully 3D platformer since Mario 64 is Prince of Persia, and in terms of gameplay (maybe bar the combat) I prefer it to Sunshine, for it's sheer smoothness and wonderfully slick play.
As for Prime and Mario Kart, I think they're both really furthered the series'. Mario Kart with it's brand-new physics and Prime with a complete revolution of Metroid. What we have are two highly refined machines that bring the series' to new levels (to a lesser extent, Mario Kart). While Mario Kart may not have that ability to make you want to play it all the time like Mario Kart 64, on the basis of the game itself, it's great, I see that as merely a tired genre, and Prime, depending on what you like and dislike about games, is flawless.
As for Mario, it's not FLUDD as such that made it so disappointing, despite that being part of the reason, I just think that Mario was trying to be more like Banjo, something that it isn't. Not in style of play or presentation, but Banjo was an adventure game and Mario 64 was a platforming game, despite their similarities, they were worlds apart in terms of play. But Sunshine, like many other so-called 3D platformers, turned into more of an adventure game than anything, bar the mini game sections that excluded FLUDD. It was original, it was fun, but was it Mario? No, it was this new adventuring star that no one had heard of, let's just called him Marino for now. Marino wanted to collect blue coins, search worlds for Shine Sprites and adventure. Even though the set up of collecting shines was very similar to stars in Mario 64, gameplay itself is worlds apart.
Mario just wanted to get to his star and retrieve it, no aimless searching for blue coins and other randomly placed shines. The levels were linear in that you could just go to where you wanted, get the star and go away (even though there were vast amounts to explore), but having the choice to go on multiple different levels to gain stars made it all the better. Mario 64 was about acrobatics and skillfully making your way to the top of some mountain, or to a bomb-shaped boss of some sort. Sunshine was an adventure game with jumping as a mere obstacle, that was made easy with FLUDD. In no way did it heighten the platforming experience, it destroyed it, which is something Marino shouldn't have done.
The closest we've got, in my opinion, to a faithfully 3D platformer since Mario 64 is Prince of Persia, and in terms of gameplay (maybe bar the combat) I prefer it to Sunshine, for it's sheer smoothness and wonderfully slick play.
As for Prime and Mario Kart, I think they're both really furthered the series'. Mario Kart with it's brand-new physics and Prime with a complete revolution of Metroid. What we have are two highly refined machines that bring the series' to new levels (to a lesser extent, Mario Kart). While Mario Kart may not have that ability to make you want to play it all the time like Mario Kart 64, on the basis of the game itself, it's great, I see that as merely a tired genre, and Prime, depending on what you like and dislike about games, is flawless.
The changes aren't the problem.
The fact is, Nintendo aren't putting full effort into the content of the titles nowdays and the "change" becomes the scapegoat.
I didn't have a problem with Zelda's cel shading, and although I prefer Mario without Fludd, the squirty thingamy wasn't one of my issues with the game.
Yeah, getting rid of Mario Kart's jump was awful but I probably wouldn't have liked the game anyway.
As to Final Fantasy, I thought it sounded great - away with the old fashioned menu's and a true update of Secret of Mana - until I found out that I'd need to splash out on 3 GBA's + link cables to get the best out of it.
Nintendo have some great idea's, they're just not following them through properly. Hopefully, they're learning from this in time for the DS.
The fact is, Nintendo aren't putting full effort into the content of the titles nowdays and the "change" becomes the scapegoat.
I didn't have a problem with Zelda's cel shading, and although I prefer Mario without Fludd, the squirty thingamy wasn't one of my issues with the game.
Yeah, getting rid of Mario Kart's jump was awful but I probably wouldn't have liked the game anyway.
As to Final Fantasy, I thought it sounded great - away with the old fashioned menu's and a true update of Secret of Mana - until I found out that I'd need to splash out on 3 GBA's + link cables to get the best out of it.
Nintendo have some great idea's, they're just not following them through properly. Hopefully, they're learning from this in time for the DS.
Starlight wrote:
> Nintendo changing their popular franchises is more frequent and
> annoying now.
>
> Mario - Stupid water jetpack thing
> Zelda - Stupid graphics (I don't care if you like em, proper 3D
> worlds would have been better and you know it)
> Final Fantasy (Okay not nintendos franchise but still) - Stupid
> battle system and you can only really play it if there's four of you
> and you're all rich
If you want the same game then just play the older games again.
Mario Kart, Metroid Prime, Mario Sunshine and Zelda have all attempted change and they all succeeded with Prime and Kart being better improved.
Wind Waker is a fantastic game, and the toon shaded effect doesn't make the game "improper 3D"... the game is in 3D just with a different graphical effect. The main change in Wind Waker i'd say is the sailing and I enjoyed that.
Prime changed for the better, a beautiful rendition. Mario Sunshine got a mixed response but that's irrelevent... if I wanted MArio 64 I'd play Mario 64. It was a nice change, maybe don't do it again, but it wasn't bad.
Mario Kart's dual system extended the multiplayer possibilties and added extra tactial elements to the gameplay and this was a nice change.
As for Final Fantasy well I have this to say on the matter. Crystal Chronicles is a greatly original game with Final Fantasy Iconography. If I wanted a traditional sonyfied RPG like Final Fantasy then I'd buy the game on the PS2 as there are more varieties and it can hold bigger games.
The Gamecube is a proud system, we have our own titles that can hold up by themselves. I've got the 64 for Ocarina of Time alikes and Mario 64, A PS2 has traditional Final Fantasy games.
I'd much rather Nintendo have their own unique Final Fantasy series that Sony doesn't have rather than an extension of an already successful franchise.
> Nintendo changing their popular franchises is more frequent and
> annoying now.
>
> Mario - Stupid water jetpack thing
> Zelda - Stupid graphics (I don't care if you like em, proper 3D
> worlds would have been better and you know it)
> Final Fantasy (Okay not nintendos franchise but still) - Stupid
> battle system and you can only really play it if there's four of you
> and you're all rich
If you want the same game then just play the older games again.
Mario Kart, Metroid Prime, Mario Sunshine and Zelda have all attempted change and they all succeeded with Prime and Kart being better improved.
Wind Waker is a fantastic game, and the toon shaded effect doesn't make the game "improper 3D"... the game is in 3D just with a different graphical effect. The main change in Wind Waker i'd say is the sailing and I enjoyed that.
Prime changed for the better, a beautiful rendition. Mario Sunshine got a mixed response but that's irrelevent... if I wanted MArio 64 I'd play Mario 64. It was a nice change, maybe don't do it again, but it wasn't bad.
Mario Kart's dual system extended the multiplayer possibilties and added extra tactial elements to the gameplay and this was a nice change.
As for Final Fantasy well I have this to say on the matter. Crystal Chronicles is a greatly original game with Final Fantasy Iconography. If I wanted a traditional sonyfied RPG like Final Fantasy then I'd buy the game on the PS2 as there are more varieties and it can hold bigger games.
The Gamecube is a proud system, we have our own titles that can hold up by themselves. I've got the 64 for Ocarina of Time alikes and Mario 64, A PS2 has traditional Final Fantasy games.
I'd much rather Nintendo have their own unique Final Fantasy series that Sony doesn't have rather than an extension of an already successful franchise.
Yeah, but it would've been even better if they'd remained faithful and put a third person mode in.
I mean, everything about the game, from the controls to the level design, was primed for third person action, apart from the scanning, the ONE thing that worked better in first person. :-)
I mean, everything about the game, from the controls to the level design, was primed for third person action, apart from the scanning, the ONE thing that worked better in first person. :-)
Page: