The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I got Blink 182's album in November last year. Amazing it is, in fact I'd say one of the best albums I have ever heard. Sadly, although many do, not everyone thinks so. There are 2 sources of criticism, the first are from the anti-pop punk crusaders claiming the album is nothing more than "generic pop punk". The problem with this criticism is that bar first release "feeling this" the album is nothing like any traditional Pop punk. The second source of criticism is the current Blink fans claiming they wanted something "like the old stuff".
I can name 5 people in my small friendship circle who wanted a more, "cheery pop-punk album and not this good but depressive mature-punk album". My reply to them is simple: "If you want cheery Punk listen to Blink's other 4 albums".
Fans of the group have to agree that despite the greatness of fourth album Take Off Your Pants And Jacket, it was VERY familiar to previous album Enema of the State... almost identical in style. So in my more optimistic eye this change is good, it is still the greatness I expect from Blink BUT it is also totally fresh and new.
Now comes to the point of the post.
Recent anti-Resident Evil 4 claims have been pointed at the more "Action" aspect of the gameplay. What no puzzles? No dumb Zombies? Less scares more action?
Yes get over it. Resident Evil 4 has changed the series just as Blink 182's new self-titled album has changed Blink 182. You see just like Blink 182's previous 4 albums, Resident Evil has endured 5 almost identical games. Resident Evil, 2, 3, Code Veronica and Zero play almost identically too each other (bar some minor gameplay twist in some titles). The games were great, but even I, an avid Resident Evil fan, were starting to get a little bored. So Resident Evil 4 COULD be a successful change in the series, sure less scares maybe BUT just as much fun and the series can continue. Blink 182's latest album have kept the immature Punk Pop outfit alive into this new generation, Resident Evil was becoming stale. It needed a change.
Most of you I'm sure would agree with the above. But now I bring in my next set of examples. You see I've been defending Zelda: Wind Waker and Mario Sunshine to the grave lately against an endless supply of critics. And in this I'll also defend the game I don't enjoy too much, Metroid Prime. You see my defense of Wind Waker is thus, the combat system and the graphics have changed the style of game so much that the title rules. The aggressors to the title claim "The lack of epic storyline, length and interaction have damaged what Zelda used to be and therefore is not as good as the previous games".
Nonsense.
If I want interaction I'll play Majora's Mask, just as if I want pop-punk I'll listen to older Blink material. If I want an epic storyline then I'll play Ocarina of Time. If I want an addictive control system, an emphasis on collecting and a great comic adventure then I'll play Wind Waker. But why can't they include all three I hear you cry? Well Nintendo can make an epic adventure, they proved that with OOT. They can make a fantastic interaction filled adventure, they proved that with MM and they can adopt amazing graphics, controls and comedy as they did in WW. But Majoras Mask's interaction is VERY complicated and took nearly a year to implement entirely. Ocarina of Time took nearly 4 years to make mainly due to it's size, and the graphics and gameplay of Wind Waker took the majority of it's development time. Do you think Nintendo have deep enough pockets to waste their most talented development team on what could be a multi-million 7 year project? Of course not! So Nintendo opted to give us something slightly different instead, a different Zelda experience.
The same applies to Super Mario Sunshine. Yes you are TOTALLY right, the game is missing Koopa's etc... the game does include a back pack changing Mario's ideas. The recent Edge magazine asks to put the Italian back into his old games. That is what we want. But the thing is we ALREADY have Mario 64. Yes we all really wanted a Gamecube edition of Mario 64, but instead Nintendo gave us a new option. They gave us a new game, different to IMario 64 but somehow similar. We've already got a fantastic 3D platformer that is like Mario titles, now we wanted the similar level of fun but in a different way. And we got it.
Metroid Prime is my final example because I can't really be bothered to go into Double Dash (I'm sure you've got my point anyway). Yes a third person platformer would be fantastic but then there have been countless third person Metroid games. Isn't it about time things changed?
My point is thus, and I'm sure you got it, game series' evolve in order to survive. Moods and opinions change. Playing Ocarina Of Time with my Gamecube Bonus Disc was fun for five minutes. I soon realised it wasn't for today's market. Neither is any of the Resident Evil games we have got. The lack of epic story in Wind Waker maybe cleared up for next time, but the emphasis on light hearted fun with stella graphics and gameplay will still exist. Maybe Samus will appear more out of her suit in the next Metroid but the new first person adventure idea will continue to apply. Mario 128 may return to more familiar surroundings, but expect similar new ideas to the ones we got in Sunshine.
Resident Evil 4 is more action based because it has to be in order to survive and keep us interested. We are never really happy with what we get even if we didn't really know what we wanted in the first place. We are constantly evolving, games are constantly evolving. Goodbye Resident Evil, you were fun for a while but now I need a new experience. Gracefully give up your Survival Horror King status or change.
You choose.
I’m off to listen to Blink.
Dringo.
I can name 5 people in my small friendship circle who wanted a more, "cheery pop-punk album and not this good but depressive mature-punk album". My reply to them is simple: "If you want cheery Punk listen to Blink's other 4 albums".
Fans of the group have to agree that despite the greatness of fourth album Take Off Your Pants And Jacket, it was VERY familiar to previous album Enema of the State... almost identical in style. So in my more optimistic eye this change is good, it is still the greatness I expect from Blink BUT it is also totally fresh and new.
Now comes to the point of the post.
Recent anti-Resident Evil 4 claims have been pointed at the more "Action" aspect of the gameplay. What no puzzles? No dumb Zombies? Less scares more action?
Yes get over it. Resident Evil 4 has changed the series just as Blink 182's new self-titled album has changed Blink 182. You see just like Blink 182's previous 4 albums, Resident Evil has endured 5 almost identical games. Resident Evil, 2, 3, Code Veronica and Zero play almost identically too each other (bar some minor gameplay twist in some titles). The games were great, but even I, an avid Resident Evil fan, were starting to get a little bored. So Resident Evil 4 COULD be a successful change in the series, sure less scares maybe BUT just as much fun and the series can continue. Blink 182's latest album have kept the immature Punk Pop outfit alive into this new generation, Resident Evil was becoming stale. It needed a change.
Most of you I'm sure would agree with the above. But now I bring in my next set of examples. You see I've been defending Zelda: Wind Waker and Mario Sunshine to the grave lately against an endless supply of critics. And in this I'll also defend the game I don't enjoy too much, Metroid Prime. You see my defense of Wind Waker is thus, the combat system and the graphics have changed the style of game so much that the title rules. The aggressors to the title claim "The lack of epic storyline, length and interaction have damaged what Zelda used to be and therefore is not as good as the previous games".
Nonsense.
If I want interaction I'll play Majora's Mask, just as if I want pop-punk I'll listen to older Blink material. If I want an epic storyline then I'll play Ocarina of Time. If I want an addictive control system, an emphasis on collecting and a great comic adventure then I'll play Wind Waker. But why can't they include all three I hear you cry? Well Nintendo can make an epic adventure, they proved that with OOT. They can make a fantastic interaction filled adventure, they proved that with MM and they can adopt amazing graphics, controls and comedy as they did in WW. But Majoras Mask's interaction is VERY complicated and took nearly a year to implement entirely. Ocarina of Time took nearly 4 years to make mainly due to it's size, and the graphics and gameplay of Wind Waker took the majority of it's development time. Do you think Nintendo have deep enough pockets to waste their most talented development team on what could be a multi-million 7 year project? Of course not! So Nintendo opted to give us something slightly different instead, a different Zelda experience.
The same applies to Super Mario Sunshine. Yes you are TOTALLY right, the game is missing Koopa's etc... the game does include a back pack changing Mario's ideas. The recent Edge magazine asks to put the Italian back into his old games. That is what we want. But the thing is we ALREADY have Mario 64. Yes we all really wanted a Gamecube edition of Mario 64, but instead Nintendo gave us a new option. They gave us a new game, different to IMario 64 but somehow similar. We've already got a fantastic 3D platformer that is like Mario titles, now we wanted the similar level of fun but in a different way. And we got it.
Metroid Prime is my final example because I can't really be bothered to go into Double Dash (I'm sure you've got my point anyway). Yes a third person platformer would be fantastic but then there have been countless third person Metroid games. Isn't it about time things changed?
My point is thus, and I'm sure you got it, game series' evolve in order to survive. Moods and opinions change. Playing Ocarina Of Time with my Gamecube Bonus Disc was fun for five minutes. I soon realised it wasn't for today's market. Neither is any of the Resident Evil games we have got. The lack of epic story in Wind Waker maybe cleared up for next time, but the emphasis on light hearted fun with stella graphics and gameplay will still exist. Maybe Samus will appear more out of her suit in the next Metroid but the new first person adventure idea will continue to apply. Mario 128 may return to more familiar surroundings, but expect similar new ideas to the ones we got in Sunshine.
Resident Evil 4 is more action based because it has to be in order to survive and keep us interested. We are never really happy with what we get even if we didn't really know what we wanted in the first place. We are constantly evolving, games are constantly evolving. Goodbye Resident Evil, you were fun for a while but now I need a new experience. Gracefully give up your Survival Horror King status or change.
You choose.
I’m off to listen to Blink.
Dringo.
Page:
This comes pretty close to being a review of a game that isn't out yet.
Puzzles are always copied in all zelda games.
And the dungeon design on MM was crap.
And the dungeon design on MM was crap.
Strafio wrote:
>
>
> Fair enough that you enjoyed it, but I get the feeling that more
> people than not take the "half-hashed" point of view.
> I remember most reviews doing so.
I remember Cube scoring them 95 or something similar, NGC giving scores of 96 with NOM giving them the highest scores possible.
As for the other places I genuinly do not know.
And when Sunshine came out we all went "hell yeah" bar a few of us and then a year later the majority had turned their plea to "It's naff".
>
>
> Fair enough that you enjoyed it, but I get the feeling that more
> people than not take the "half-hashed" point of view.
> I remember most reviews doing so.
I remember Cube scoring them 95 or something similar, NGC giving scores of 96 with NOM giving them the highest scores possible.
As for the other places I genuinly do not know.
And when Sunshine came out we all went "hell yeah" bar a few of us and then a year later the majority had turned their plea to "It's naff".
To be honest, the lack of classic Mario enemies in Sunshien didn't bother me in the slightest, neither did the specific theme. It just completely lacked the scope of other Mario games; 64 was so great because the exapansive levels could be explored for hours on end, its control system may not have been complex, but it needed to be mastered if you wanted to succeedand there was always a challenge to get you stumped.
Sunshine's levels were brilliant in parts and the flair and imagination was still there, but I felt limited throughout the entire adventure. Stripping the plumber (oo-er) of his FLUDD in the classic platforming mini-games made you realise how much more fun raw, skilled platforming is. Sunshine, despite having an in-depth control system to further gameplay, if anything it limited you in hwo you play.
Whenever a problem arose, FLUDD was always there to bail you out, no more pinpoint-accuracy with jumping, not as much classic jumping on heads, it felt all so easy. The great Mario revolution turned out to be its biggest downfall, stunting you from really embracing what fun Mario games are. Remember staying up for horus on end trying to complete Mario Bros. 3 on the NES? I do, and that's how I really see Mario games; both a challenge and a joy to play. It's always been platformign in its purest form.
The same goes for Wind Waker; the lack of challenging tasks did negate from an awe-inspiring experience. It had its moments (Frozen Hyrule remains one the best gaming moments I've had the joy of taking part in), and liek you said the control system was highly refined, but it has nothign on the puzzles, dungeon design, storyline, character interaction and all-round twisted atmosphere that Majora's Mask ecompassed. You could say they excel in different areas, but why have three games in the same series aiming for completely different goals?
I agree that Zelda was furthered in some way, the Deku Leaf and the like were a stroke of genius, but the core of the game, the adventure itself, was severely lacking. Nintendo nicked puzzles from older Zelda games and they proved to be very easy.
Now the visuals are lovely, and I've always thought so, but the big change may have not been the best for Zelda. MM proved that a darker storyline and atmosphere worked well in a Zelda game, and seeing it passed over to the newer game would have been great.
Sunshine's levels were brilliant in parts and the flair and imagination was still there, but I felt limited throughout the entire adventure. Stripping the plumber (oo-er) of his FLUDD in the classic platforming mini-games made you realise how much more fun raw, skilled platforming is. Sunshine, despite having an in-depth control system to further gameplay, if anything it limited you in hwo you play.
Whenever a problem arose, FLUDD was always there to bail you out, no more pinpoint-accuracy with jumping, not as much classic jumping on heads, it felt all so easy. The great Mario revolution turned out to be its biggest downfall, stunting you from really embracing what fun Mario games are. Remember staying up for horus on end trying to complete Mario Bros. 3 on the NES? I do, and that's how I really see Mario games; both a challenge and a joy to play. It's always been platformign in its purest form.
The same goes for Wind Waker; the lack of challenging tasks did negate from an awe-inspiring experience. It had its moments (Frozen Hyrule remains one the best gaming moments I've had the joy of taking part in), and liek you said the control system was highly refined, but it has nothign on the puzzles, dungeon design, storyline, character interaction and all-round twisted atmosphere that Majora's Mask ecompassed. You could say they excel in different areas, but why have three games in the same series aiming for completely different goals?
I agree that Zelda was furthered in some way, the Deku Leaf and the like were a stroke of genius, but the core of the game, the adventure itself, was severely lacking. Nintendo nicked puzzles from older Zelda games and they proved to be very easy.
Now the visuals are lovely, and I've always thought so, but the big change may have not been the best for Zelda. MM proved that a darker storyline and atmosphere worked well in a Zelda game, and seeing it passed over to the newer game would have been great.
Okay. So you didn't find them half-hased, and I can't change your opinion. :-)
However, it seems that more people than not do.
That's why seemingly everyone other than you (and Alistair) aren't so enamoured with them.
New idea's NEVER counter balance a lack of game unless they're really special. So Pikmin got away with it.
Mario Sunshines new ideas?
People and a backpack?
Not awful idea's but hardly mind blowing.
Not a bad Mario spin-off game, it's jsut we were expecting the next big thing in Mario tradition.
And Windwaker wasn't THAT much more humourous than OOT (now let's give brother Link a BIG Goron hug) or Majora's Mask (when you stole that guy's room).
As for the action, that was the main complaint.
Other than the bosses, the only decent fight you got was in Hyrule Castle.
You got the odd decent mini-boss, but most of the time you were just sailing...
A great fighting system but barely anything to use it against.
If more than 4-5 of the Islands had had proper life on them then it might not have been so bad, but most of them were just a dead piece of rock.
Fair enough that you enjoyed it, but I get the feeling that more people than not take the "half-hashed" point of view.
I remember most reviews doing so.
However, it seems that more people than not do.
That's why seemingly everyone other than you (and Alistair) aren't so enamoured with them.
New idea's NEVER counter balance a lack of game unless they're really special. So Pikmin got away with it.
Mario Sunshines new ideas?
People and a backpack?
Not awful idea's but hardly mind blowing.
Not a bad Mario spin-off game, it's jsut we were expecting the next big thing in Mario tradition.
And Windwaker wasn't THAT much more humourous than OOT (now let's give brother Link a BIG Goron hug) or Majora's Mask (when you stole that guy's room).
As for the action, that was the main complaint.
Other than the bosses, the only decent fight you got was in Hyrule Castle.
You got the odd decent mini-boss, but most of the time you were just sailing...
A great fighting system but barely anything to use it against.
If more than 4-5 of the Islands had had proper life on them then it might not have been so bad, but most of them were just a dead piece of rock.
Fair enough that you enjoyed it, but I get the feeling that more people than not take the "half-hashed" point of view.
I remember most reviews doing so.
I didn't find Mario Sunshine OR wind Waker half hashed... that's what I really don't get. I found Zelda lacked some involvement (although it was still there) and I found that Mario Sunshine lacked some more traditional Mario ideals.
But then they were counter-balanced with other new ideas. Mario Sunshine's backpack, new setting, people in environments sorta idea was really new, not sure if the latter 2 worked TOO well but it was fresh and that's the main point.
If I want OOT I'll play OOT. I doubt that'll ever be beating for how epic it was. Wind Waker lacked the epic nature and it lacked the interaction of Majora's Mask... but it still had interaction... it still had a relativly smart story too. Just the emphasis this time, much like Resident Evil 4, was on the action. The animations of the bad guys, the ability to fly, pick up weapons, more weapons than before, the ability to roll around, spin over, the numerous attack patterns... suddenly the previous excellent combat system of OOT was quaking in the wake of this new, highly improved system.
And it made ALL the difference, this is why we had sections just where you fought baddies... cause this was fun. We also had a dose of humour and an emphasis on collecting as well as some sea ideas. It was still slightly epic... but not as much... no the designers spent all their time making the game more action based. And all the better for it.
But then they were counter-balanced with other new ideas. Mario Sunshine's backpack, new setting, people in environments sorta idea was really new, not sure if the latter 2 worked TOO well but it was fresh and that's the main point.
If I want OOT I'll play OOT. I doubt that'll ever be beating for how epic it was. Wind Waker lacked the epic nature and it lacked the interaction of Majora's Mask... but it still had interaction... it still had a relativly smart story too. Just the emphasis this time, much like Resident Evil 4, was on the action. The animations of the bad guys, the ability to fly, pick up weapons, more weapons than before, the ability to roll around, spin over, the numerous attack patterns... suddenly the previous excellent combat system of OOT was quaking in the wake of this new, highly improved system.
And it made ALL the difference, this is why we had sections just where you fought baddies... cause this was fun. We also had a dose of humour and an emphasis on collecting as well as some sea ideas. It was still slightly epic... but not as much... no the designers spent all their time making the game more action based. And all the better for it.
Ok. Nice try. But there's a difference. :-)
I'm not familiar with Blink 182, but I can give an analogy with the Stone Roses. In the late 80's they dominated Manchester's music scene alongside house music, the Hacienda and the Happy Mondays.
Their selt-titled debut album came out in 1989, closely followed by the single Fools Gold. Every song was perfection and they inspired the entire brit-pop mid-Nineties, not least a certain Mr Liam Gallagher who completely modelled himself on the Roses lead singer.
Anysway, their music, attitude, style and image was a mix and match of old and new and abstract, but it was defiantly theirs and it was what the world needed over the background of awful 80's pop.
They were the band of the moment.
So they ditched their awful old contract and label, and signed to Geffen who gave them millions in advance and hundreds of extras and the Stone Roses spent 5 years, doing something, and then another album appeared.
The Second Coming.
It was the Stone Roses, but it wasn't the same band that had left the Glasgow Green in 1990. Time had changed them, and they were technically betetr musicians, with technically great music backed by better technology, but their music had lost it's heart and soul.
You could see remanants of their old style, but they'd moved towards everything they'd been slating when they started - cliche rock and roll.
They split apart shortly afterwards but you could tell that they'd already split before, that it was individuals playing their instruments, rather than a band.
And so the bubble burst and their fans were left to cling to the past, find new idols or try and pick up where they left off in their own bands.
So sure a difference is good. And I had no problem with the change in setting Mario or the change in graphics in Zelda. Infact, I liked it.
Unfortunately, it did not make up for the game in either case.
I'll carry on with:
Dringo wrote:
> You see my defense of Wind
> Waker is thus, the combat system and the graphics have changed the
> style of game so much that the title rules. The aggressors to the
> title claim "The lack of epic storyline, length and interaction
> have damaged what Zelda used to be and therefore is not as good as
> the previous games".
>
> Nonsense.
>
> If I want interaction I'll play Majora's Mask, just as if I
> want pop-punk I'll listen to older Blink material. If I want an epic
> storyline then I'll play Ocarina of Time. If I want an
> addictive control system, an emphasis on collecting and a great comic
> adventure then I'll play Wind Waker. But why can't they
> include all three I hear you cry? Well Nintendo can make an epic
> adventure, they proved that with OOT. They can make a fantastic
> interaction filled adventure, they proved that with MM and they can
> adopt amazing graphics, controls and comedy as they did in WW. But
> Majoras Mask's interaction is VERY complicated and took nearly
> a year to implement entirely. Ocarina of Time took nearly 4
> years to make mainly due to it's size... and the graphics and
> gameplay of Wind Waker took the majority of it's development
> time. Do you think Nintendo have deep enough pockets to waste their
> most talented development team on what could be a multi-million 7
> year project? Of course not! So Nintendo opted to give us something
> slightly different instead... a different Zelda experience.
It wasn't that different though.
All that was different was a slightly greased up control system (which was great) and a setting of sea where you'd sail for ages to an island to find a piece of dead rock, and then sail on.
Yeah, it was different, but that wasn't the problem.
It didn't grip me at all. I didn't care for the characters like in Majora's Mask. The story was a mess, and it had it's moments, but compared to the experience of other Zelda games, it sucked.
So I get what you're saying. Not EVERY Zelda has to be the bestest game Nintendo ever did, and so it wasn't. We were just disappointed because we were expecting the next OOT.
No one's said it was an awful game. We were just expecting the next BIG thing. We didn't want it exactly the same as OOT again. But OOT had heart and soul put into it's making. WW had heart and soul in it's controls and the rest was a quick slap up to get it out on the shelves.
And it shows. To the rest of us atleast. :-)
> The same applies to Super Mario Sunshine. Yes you are TOTALLY
> right, the game is missing Koopa's etc... the game does include a
> back pack changing Mario's ideas. The recent Edge magazine asks to
> put the Italian back into his old games. That is what we want. But
> the thing is we ALREADY have Mario 64. Yes we all really
> wanted a Gamecube edition of Mario 64, but instead Nintendo
> gave us a new option. They gave us a new game, different to IMario
> 64 but somehow similar. We've already got a fantastic 3D
> platformer that is like Mario titles, now we wanted the similar level
> of fun but in a different way. And we got it.
Yep, but again, it was watered down.
The thought seemed to end after the control system and the first few levels. I had great fun kicking the coconut around, and just jumping around Delphino, but just as I thought I'd started, it was almost over.
Great gameplay stuffed into a half hashed game.
You're right. It was a different Mario game, rather than a bad Mario game. but Mario 64 and Mario 3 (Mario World was Samey to Mario 3) managed to be different AND mind blowing. This was the first proper Mario game to be half hashed. And it showed. Not that it was bad, we were just brought up to expect Mario games to be the next BIG thing, that's all. :-)
> Metroid Prime is my final example because I can't really be
> bothered to go into Double Dash (I'm sure you've got my point
> anyway). Yes a third person platformer would be fantastic but then
> there have been countless third person Metroid games. Isn't it about
> time things changed?
Change for the sake of change?
Well, 2D platformers are two a penny. But how many decent adult 3D platformers are there? See the idolisation of the Tombraider series? Yes?
FP games, meanwhile, are two a penny.
Now Metroid Prime warped them beyond belief, but you can tell by the gameplay that it's a third person game in a FPS view. Everything about it seems designed for Third Person except for the visors.
I'm not slating it for being different. I think it should have a third person mode for atleast 2 VERY good reasons:
a) Samus is the coolest character ever with the coolest moves ever and it wasted on a game where you barely see her or her moves. She looked cool in the cutscenes and morphball, and in the artwork, but the rest you can only imagine while playing with her on Smash Brothers.
b) There was so much gameplay in Metroid Prime that involved platforming and manauvering, and while the FP view managed to surfice, it's like the equivilant of aiming in 3rd P - CAN be done, but isn't natural.
And it had that lock-on system to get by the 3d P disability in the manual aiming department.
I'm not slating Metroid Prime. It's still a blindingly good game - best single player game on the Gamecube, but I stand by my third person "views"! :-)
> My point is thus, and I'm sure you got it, game series' evolve in
> order to survive. Moods and opinions change. Playing Ocarina Of
> Time with my Gamecube Bonus Disc was fun for five minutes. I soon
> realised it wasn't for today's market. Neither is any of the Resident
> Evil games we have got. The lack of epic story in Wind Waker
> maybe cleared up for next time, but the emphasis on light hearted fun
> with stella graphics and gameplay will still exist. Maybe Samus will
> appear more out of her suit in the next Metroid but the new first
> person adventure idea will continue to apply. Mario 128 may
> return to more familiar surroundings, but expect similar new ideas to
> the ones we got in Sunshine.
Fair enough times change.
But I didn't complain when Mario 64 ditched it's traditional Mario World level style for stars. Because the new way was still brilliant.
It wasn't change that ruined Windwaker and Sunshine, it's because that change was half hearted. Not done properly.
There were a fair few light hearted moments in WW but the rest was fairly lifeless and boring.
Mario Sunshine was just Mario 64 for beginners with less levels.
The levels did show improvements in terms of what you could do with them, but they were fairly minor and weren't taken THAT far.
Not that Sunshine and WW are BAD games, it's jsut that once upon a time, Nintendo use to make their games mind blowing in EVERY way, not just make a sweet control system and forget about the rest of it.
> Resident Evil 4 is more action based because it has to be in
> order to survive and keep us interested. We are never really happy
> with what we get even if we didn't really know what we wanted in the
> first place. We are constantly evolving, games are constantly
> evolving. Goodbye Resident Evil, you were fun for a while but now I
> need a new experience... gracefully give up your Survival Horror King
> status or change.
I'm not a Resi fan so I can't argue here.
But lets put it this way:
Resi 4 looks like a change for the better.
Resi survivor is also a change to action.
Now THAT'S the difference between a genuine evolution and a half hashed twist up.
> You choose.
:-)
I'm not familiar with Blink 182, but I can give an analogy with the Stone Roses. In the late 80's they dominated Manchester's music scene alongside house music, the Hacienda and the Happy Mondays.
Their selt-titled debut album came out in 1989, closely followed by the single Fools Gold. Every song was perfection and they inspired the entire brit-pop mid-Nineties, not least a certain Mr Liam Gallagher who completely modelled himself on the Roses lead singer.
Anysway, their music, attitude, style and image was a mix and match of old and new and abstract, but it was defiantly theirs and it was what the world needed over the background of awful 80's pop.
They were the band of the moment.
So they ditched their awful old contract and label, and signed to Geffen who gave them millions in advance and hundreds of extras and the Stone Roses spent 5 years, doing something, and then another album appeared.
The Second Coming.
It was the Stone Roses, but it wasn't the same band that had left the Glasgow Green in 1990. Time had changed them, and they were technically betetr musicians, with technically great music backed by better technology, but their music had lost it's heart and soul.
You could see remanants of their old style, but they'd moved towards everything they'd been slating when they started - cliche rock and roll.
They split apart shortly afterwards but you could tell that they'd already split before, that it was individuals playing their instruments, rather than a band.
And so the bubble burst and their fans were left to cling to the past, find new idols or try and pick up where they left off in their own bands.
So sure a difference is good. And I had no problem with the change in setting Mario or the change in graphics in Zelda. Infact, I liked it.
Unfortunately, it did not make up for the game in either case.
I'll carry on with:
Dringo wrote:
> You see my defense of Wind
> Waker is thus, the combat system and the graphics have changed the
> style of game so much that the title rules. The aggressors to the
> title claim "The lack of epic storyline, length and interaction
> have damaged what Zelda used to be and therefore is not as good as
> the previous games".
>
> Nonsense.
>
> If I want interaction I'll play Majora's Mask, just as if I
> want pop-punk I'll listen to older Blink material. If I want an epic
> storyline then I'll play Ocarina of Time. If I want an
> addictive control system, an emphasis on collecting and a great comic
> adventure then I'll play Wind Waker. But why can't they
> include all three I hear you cry? Well Nintendo can make an epic
> adventure, they proved that with OOT. They can make a fantastic
> interaction filled adventure, they proved that with MM and they can
> adopt amazing graphics, controls and comedy as they did in WW. But
> Majoras Mask's interaction is VERY complicated and took nearly
> a year to implement entirely. Ocarina of Time took nearly 4
> years to make mainly due to it's size... and the graphics and
> gameplay of Wind Waker took the majority of it's development
> time. Do you think Nintendo have deep enough pockets to waste their
> most talented development team on what could be a multi-million 7
> year project? Of course not! So Nintendo opted to give us something
> slightly different instead... a different Zelda experience.
It wasn't that different though.
All that was different was a slightly greased up control system (which was great) and a setting of sea where you'd sail for ages to an island to find a piece of dead rock, and then sail on.
Yeah, it was different, but that wasn't the problem.
It didn't grip me at all. I didn't care for the characters like in Majora's Mask. The story was a mess, and it had it's moments, but compared to the experience of other Zelda games, it sucked.
So I get what you're saying. Not EVERY Zelda has to be the bestest game Nintendo ever did, and so it wasn't. We were just disappointed because we were expecting the next OOT.
No one's said it was an awful game. We were just expecting the next BIG thing. We didn't want it exactly the same as OOT again. But OOT had heart and soul put into it's making. WW had heart and soul in it's controls and the rest was a quick slap up to get it out on the shelves.
And it shows. To the rest of us atleast. :-)
> The same applies to Super Mario Sunshine. Yes you are TOTALLY
> right, the game is missing Koopa's etc... the game does include a
> back pack changing Mario's ideas. The recent Edge magazine asks to
> put the Italian back into his old games. That is what we want. But
> the thing is we ALREADY have Mario 64. Yes we all really
> wanted a Gamecube edition of Mario 64, but instead Nintendo
> gave us a new option. They gave us a new game, different to IMario
> 64 but somehow similar. We've already got a fantastic 3D
> platformer that is like Mario titles, now we wanted the similar level
> of fun but in a different way. And we got it.
Yep, but again, it was watered down.
The thought seemed to end after the control system and the first few levels. I had great fun kicking the coconut around, and just jumping around Delphino, but just as I thought I'd started, it was almost over.
Great gameplay stuffed into a half hashed game.
You're right. It was a different Mario game, rather than a bad Mario game. but Mario 64 and Mario 3 (Mario World was Samey to Mario 3) managed to be different AND mind blowing. This was the first proper Mario game to be half hashed. And it showed. Not that it was bad, we were just brought up to expect Mario games to be the next BIG thing, that's all. :-)
> Metroid Prime is my final example because I can't really be
> bothered to go into Double Dash (I'm sure you've got my point
> anyway). Yes a third person platformer would be fantastic but then
> there have been countless third person Metroid games. Isn't it about
> time things changed?
Change for the sake of change?
Well, 2D platformers are two a penny. But how many decent adult 3D platformers are there? See the idolisation of the Tombraider series? Yes?
FP games, meanwhile, are two a penny.
Now Metroid Prime warped them beyond belief, but you can tell by the gameplay that it's a third person game in a FPS view. Everything about it seems designed for Third Person except for the visors.
I'm not slating it for being different. I think it should have a third person mode for atleast 2 VERY good reasons:
a) Samus is the coolest character ever with the coolest moves ever and it wasted on a game where you barely see her or her moves. She looked cool in the cutscenes and morphball, and in the artwork, but the rest you can only imagine while playing with her on Smash Brothers.
b) There was so much gameplay in Metroid Prime that involved platforming and manauvering, and while the FP view managed to surfice, it's like the equivilant of aiming in 3rd P - CAN be done, but isn't natural.
And it had that lock-on system to get by the 3d P disability in the manual aiming department.
I'm not slating Metroid Prime. It's still a blindingly good game - best single player game on the Gamecube, but I stand by my third person "views"! :-)
> My point is thus, and I'm sure you got it, game series' evolve in
> order to survive. Moods and opinions change. Playing Ocarina Of
> Time with my Gamecube Bonus Disc was fun for five minutes. I soon
> realised it wasn't for today's market. Neither is any of the Resident
> Evil games we have got. The lack of epic story in Wind Waker
> maybe cleared up for next time, but the emphasis on light hearted fun
> with stella graphics and gameplay will still exist. Maybe Samus will
> appear more out of her suit in the next Metroid but the new first
> person adventure idea will continue to apply. Mario 128 may
> return to more familiar surroundings, but expect similar new ideas to
> the ones we got in Sunshine.
Fair enough times change.
But I didn't complain when Mario 64 ditched it's traditional Mario World level style for stars. Because the new way was still brilliant.
It wasn't change that ruined Windwaker and Sunshine, it's because that change was half hearted. Not done properly.
There were a fair few light hearted moments in WW but the rest was fairly lifeless and boring.
Mario Sunshine was just Mario 64 for beginners with less levels.
The levels did show improvements in terms of what you could do with them, but they were fairly minor and weren't taken THAT far.
Not that Sunshine and WW are BAD games, it's jsut that once upon a time, Nintendo use to make their games mind blowing in EVERY way, not just make a sweet control system and forget about the rest of it.
> Resident Evil 4 is more action based because it has to be in
> order to survive and keep us interested. We are never really happy
> with what we get even if we didn't really know what we wanted in the
> first place. We are constantly evolving, games are constantly
> evolving. Goodbye Resident Evil, you were fun for a while but now I
> need a new experience... gracefully give up your Survival Horror King
> status or change.
I'm not a Resi fan so I can't argue here.
But lets put it this way:
Resi 4 looks like a change for the better.
Resi survivor is also a change to action.
Now THAT'S the difference between a genuine evolution and a half hashed twist up.
> You choose.
:-)
Miss you... Miss you...
I got Blink 182's album in November last year. Amazing it is, in fact I'd say one of the best albums I have ever heard. Sadly, although many do, not everyone thinks so. There are 2 sources of criticism, the first are from the anti-pop punk crusaders claiming the album is nothing more than "generic pop punk". The problem with this criticism is that bar first release "feeling this" the album is nothing like any traditional Pop punk. The second source of criticism is the current Blink fans claiming they wanted something "like the old stuff".
I can name 5 people in my small friendship circle who wanted a more, "cheery pop-punk album and not this good but depressive mature-punk album". My reply to them is simple: "If you want cheery Punk listen to Blink's other 4 albums".
Fans of the group have to agree that despite the greatness of fourth album Take Off Your Pants And Jacket, it was VERY familiar to previous album Enema of the State... almost identical in style. So in my more optimistic eye this change is good, it is still the greatness I expect from Blink BUT it is also totally fresh and new.
Now comes to the point of the post.
Recent anti-Resident Evil 4 claims have been pointed at the more "Action" aspect of the gameplay. What no puzzles? No dumb Zombies? Less scares more action?
Yes get over it. Resident Evil 4 has changed the series just as Blink 182's new self-titled album has changed Blink 182. You see just like Blink 182's previous 4 albums, Resident Evil has endured 5 almost identical games. Resident Evil, 2, 3, Code Veronica and Zero play almost identically too each other (bar some minor gameplay twist in some titles). The games were great, but even I, an avid Resident Evil fan, were starting to get a little bored. So Resident Evil 4 COULD be a successful change in the series, sure less scares maybe BUT just as much fun and the series can continue. Blink 182's latest album have kept the immature Punk Pop outfit alive into this new generation, Resident Evil was becoming stale. It needed a change.
Most of you I'm sure would agree with the above. But now I bring in my next set of examples. You see I've been defending Zelda: Wind Waker and Mario Sunshine to the grave lately against an endless supply of critics. And in this I'll also defend the game I don't enjoy too much, Metroid Prime. You see my defense of Wind Waker is thus, the combat system and the graphics have changed the style of game so much that the title rules. The aggressors to the title claim "The lack of epic storyline, length and interaction have damaged what Zelda used to be and therefore is not as good as the previous games".
Nonsense.
If I want interaction I'll play Majora's Mask, just as if I want pop-punk I'll listen to older Blink material. If I want an epic storyline then I'll play Ocarina of Time. If I want an addictive control system, an emphasis on collecting and a great comic adventure then I'll play Wind Waker. But why can't they include all three I hear you cry? Well Nintendo can make an epic adventure, they proved that with OOT. They can make a fantastic interaction filled adventure, they proved that with MM and they can adopt amazing graphics, controls and comedy as they did in WW. But Majoras Mask's interaction is VERY complicated and took nearly a year to implement entirely. Ocarina of Time took nearly 4 years to make mainly due to it's size, and the graphics and gameplay of Wind Waker took the majority of it's development time. Do you think Nintendo have deep enough pockets to waste their most talented development team on what could be a multi-million 7 year project? Of course not! So Nintendo opted to give us something slightly different instead, a different Zelda experience.
The same applies to Super Mario Sunshine. Yes you are TOTALLY right, the game is missing Koopa's etc... the game does include a back pack changing Mario's ideas. The recent Edge magazine asks to put the Italian back into his old games. That is what we want. But the thing is we ALREADY have Mario 64. Yes we all really wanted a Gamecube edition of Mario 64, but instead Nintendo gave us a new option. They gave us a new game, different to IMario 64 but somehow similar. We've already got a fantastic 3D platformer that is like Mario titles, now we wanted the similar level of fun but in a different way. And we got it.
Metroid Prime is my final example because I can't really be bothered to go into Double Dash (I'm sure you've got my point anyway). Yes a third person platformer would be fantastic but then there have been countless third person Metroid games. Isn't it about time things changed?
My point is thus, and I'm sure you got it, game series' evolve in order to survive. Moods and opinions change. Playing Ocarina Of Time with my Gamecube Bonus Disc was fun for five minutes. I soon realised it wasn't for today's market. Neither is any of the Resident Evil games we have got. The lack of epic story in Wind Waker maybe cleared up for next time, but the emphasis on light hearted fun with stella graphics and gameplay will still exist. Maybe Samus will appear more out of her suit in the next Metroid but the new first person adventure idea will continue to apply. Mario 128 may return to more familiar surroundings, but expect similar new ideas to the ones we got in Sunshine.
Resident Evil 4 is more action based because it has to be in order to survive and keep us interested. We are never really happy with what we get even if we didn't really know what we wanted in the first place. We are constantly evolving, games are constantly evolving. Goodbye Resident Evil, you were fun for a while but now I need a new experience. Gracefully give up your Survival Horror King status or change.
You choose.
I’m off to listen to Blink.
Dringo.
I can name 5 people in my small friendship circle who wanted a more, "cheery pop-punk album and not this good but depressive mature-punk album". My reply to them is simple: "If you want cheery Punk listen to Blink's other 4 albums".
Fans of the group have to agree that despite the greatness of fourth album Take Off Your Pants And Jacket, it was VERY familiar to previous album Enema of the State... almost identical in style. So in my more optimistic eye this change is good, it is still the greatness I expect from Blink BUT it is also totally fresh and new.
Now comes to the point of the post.
Recent anti-Resident Evil 4 claims have been pointed at the more "Action" aspect of the gameplay. What no puzzles? No dumb Zombies? Less scares more action?
Yes get over it. Resident Evil 4 has changed the series just as Blink 182's new self-titled album has changed Blink 182. You see just like Blink 182's previous 4 albums, Resident Evil has endured 5 almost identical games. Resident Evil, 2, 3, Code Veronica and Zero play almost identically too each other (bar some minor gameplay twist in some titles). The games were great, but even I, an avid Resident Evil fan, were starting to get a little bored. So Resident Evil 4 COULD be a successful change in the series, sure less scares maybe BUT just as much fun and the series can continue. Blink 182's latest album have kept the immature Punk Pop outfit alive into this new generation, Resident Evil was becoming stale. It needed a change.
Most of you I'm sure would agree with the above. But now I bring in my next set of examples. You see I've been defending Zelda: Wind Waker and Mario Sunshine to the grave lately against an endless supply of critics. And in this I'll also defend the game I don't enjoy too much, Metroid Prime. You see my defense of Wind Waker is thus, the combat system and the graphics have changed the style of game so much that the title rules. The aggressors to the title claim "The lack of epic storyline, length and interaction have damaged what Zelda used to be and therefore is not as good as the previous games".
Nonsense.
If I want interaction I'll play Majora's Mask, just as if I want pop-punk I'll listen to older Blink material. If I want an epic storyline then I'll play Ocarina of Time. If I want an addictive control system, an emphasis on collecting and a great comic adventure then I'll play Wind Waker. But why can't they include all three I hear you cry? Well Nintendo can make an epic adventure, they proved that with OOT. They can make a fantastic interaction filled adventure, they proved that with MM and they can adopt amazing graphics, controls and comedy as they did in WW. But Majoras Mask's interaction is VERY complicated and took nearly a year to implement entirely. Ocarina of Time took nearly 4 years to make mainly due to it's size, and the graphics and gameplay of Wind Waker took the majority of it's development time. Do you think Nintendo have deep enough pockets to waste their most talented development team on what could be a multi-million 7 year project? Of course not! So Nintendo opted to give us something slightly different instead, a different Zelda experience.
The same applies to Super Mario Sunshine. Yes you are TOTALLY right, the game is missing Koopa's etc... the game does include a back pack changing Mario's ideas. The recent Edge magazine asks to put the Italian back into his old games. That is what we want. But the thing is we ALREADY have Mario 64. Yes we all really wanted a Gamecube edition of Mario 64, but instead Nintendo gave us a new option. They gave us a new game, different to IMario 64 but somehow similar. We've already got a fantastic 3D platformer that is like Mario titles, now we wanted the similar level of fun but in a different way. And we got it.
Metroid Prime is my final example because I can't really be bothered to go into Double Dash (I'm sure you've got my point anyway). Yes a third person platformer would be fantastic but then there have been countless third person Metroid games. Isn't it about time things changed?
My point is thus, and I'm sure you got it, game series' evolve in order to survive. Moods and opinions change. Playing Ocarina Of Time with my Gamecube Bonus Disc was fun for five minutes. I soon realised it wasn't for today's market. Neither is any of the Resident Evil games we have got. The lack of epic story in Wind Waker maybe cleared up for next time, but the emphasis on light hearted fun with stella graphics and gameplay will still exist. Maybe Samus will appear more out of her suit in the next Metroid but the new first person adventure idea will continue to apply. Mario 128 may return to more familiar surroundings, but expect similar new ideas to the ones we got in Sunshine.
Resident Evil 4 is more action based because it has to be in order to survive and keep us interested. We are never really happy with what we get even if we didn't really know what we wanted in the first place. We are constantly evolving, games are constantly evolving. Goodbye Resident Evil, you were fun for a while but now I need a new experience. Gracefully give up your Survival Horror King status or change.
You choose.
I’m off to listen to Blink.
Dringo.
Page: