The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Gaming is starting to become 'a boredom relief' and 'something to do with friends if it’s raining'.
Don't believe me?
Fine.
I don't mind.
But where once gaming was the icing on the cake of our teenage lives, the fun factor has been smashed to pieces and all we worry about now is the graphics, how many polygons it can push and how much VRam the consoles have.
I blame technology for the slump in gaming.
Sounds stupid, I know, because technology started it all but if technology wasn't going so bloody fast we'd still be able to play games the way we used to, with our minds on the storyline and not the polygons and speed.
You see.... it isn't the games; it's our perception of them. Nowadays, if they don't show more than 50,000,000,000,000 or whatever polygons on the screen, the graphics have let the game down and the game' grade suffers.
Once games were played in our stride, for fun, now we have 13 and 14-year-old lads writing articles about how the longetivity and graphics clash with the movie storyline and the social acceptance of the medium set by the main characters history.
Load of crap?
Exactly, so what is the point in analysing and rating a game... we're all different.
The Gaming Line can be broken by playing too much…
No longer are you engrossed in or absorbed by the storyline, but you worry about the shape of the characters arm or the misshapen spoiler on the race car.
Enjoyment levels fall, games get bad, we buy them less because of it and games die because of lack of popularity.
It could happen.
Taking gaming so seriously isn't a good idea.
The line will break, and just when you think you've caught a pike, you bring the 2.5-line out of the water with a split end and a missing float… pity really.
Game
Don't believe me?
Fine.
I don't mind.
But where once gaming was the icing on the cake of our teenage lives, the fun factor has been smashed to pieces and all we worry about now is the graphics, how many polygons it can push and how much VRam the consoles have.
I blame technology for the slump in gaming.
Sounds stupid, I know, because technology started it all but if technology wasn't going so bloody fast we'd still be able to play games the way we used to, with our minds on the storyline and not the polygons and speed.
You see.... it isn't the games; it's our perception of them. Nowadays, if they don't show more than 50,000,000,000,000 or whatever polygons on the screen, the graphics have let the game down and the game' grade suffers.
Once games were played in our stride, for fun, now we have 13 and 14-year-old lads writing articles about how the longetivity and graphics clash with the movie storyline and the social acceptance of the medium set by the main characters history.
Load of crap?
Exactly, so what is the point in analysing and rating a game... we're all different.
The Gaming Line can be broken by playing too much…
No longer are you engrossed in or absorbed by the storyline, but you worry about the shape of the characters arm or the misshapen spoiler on the race car.
Enjoyment levels fall, games get bad, we buy them less because of it and games die because of lack of popularity.
It could happen.
Taking gaming so seriously isn't a good idea.
The line will break, and just when you think you've caught a pike, you bring the 2.5-line out of the water with a split end and a missing float… pity really.
Game
Page:
Ha! You guys are taking things to seriously.
Gaming is fun.
It won't change the world.
It won't turn you into an axe wielding maniac.
It won't lead to nuclear warfare.
It won't bring about world peace.
What it might do, however, is entertain you.
Let you forget about your problems.
Have a laugh with your mates.
I love playing games. I don't give a stuff how many polygons are displayed. I don't give a stuff if it's a cuddly bear or a police man that I'm controlling.
If you're not finding games fun anymore, it's not because there's a problem with the games, there's a problem with you.
Stop looking for something you won't get from it. It's entertainment, that's all.
It doesn't matter whose console has the biggest processor. Don't worry about it. Buy the console that has the games you like available for it. They go out and buy some games because they look fun to play.
If racing in realistic cars, with realistic physics is the thing for you, them great! Go ut, get a PS2, buy Gran Turismo 3. Have fun. If that's not your thing then don't bother. Don't buy it because it can pussh oh so many polygons, or because it displays graphics the like of which have never been seen before!
I mean if a new game came along, that offered interaction like never before, with thousands of items that cn be picked up and examined, with thousands of locations that could be explored, would you buy it on this alone?
Only if you were stupid!
If the game also boasted the opportunity to make the beds of old people, and help then in and out of the bath, would it really interest you?
Honestly, if Sim Old Folks Home had the best graphics ever, and had a great level of characrter interaction, would you be interested? Would you want to wipe an old mans bum, perfectly rounded, with every hair and pimple modelled to perfection? Amazing! You can manage the medication too! Make sure you give each patient the right dose, or you'll be calling the undertaker in the morning! Would you really want to play it?
Or would you rather play Tetris?
The thing is there are still amazing games out there. Games that do offer truelly original concepts. Games that are still fun to play. Technology hasn't harmed gaming, it's making it better.
It's big business these days, you've just got to know where to look for the decent games, and don't go on about there being nothing worth playing out there. I'm still having fun, so should you be.
Gaming is fun.
It won't change the world.
It won't turn you into an axe wielding maniac.
It won't lead to nuclear warfare.
It won't bring about world peace.
What it might do, however, is entertain you.
Let you forget about your problems.
Have a laugh with your mates.
I love playing games. I don't give a stuff how many polygons are displayed. I don't give a stuff if it's a cuddly bear or a police man that I'm controlling.
If you're not finding games fun anymore, it's not because there's a problem with the games, there's a problem with you.
Stop looking for something you won't get from it. It's entertainment, that's all.
It doesn't matter whose console has the biggest processor. Don't worry about it. Buy the console that has the games you like available for it. They go out and buy some games because they look fun to play.
If racing in realistic cars, with realistic physics is the thing for you, them great! Go ut, get a PS2, buy Gran Turismo 3. Have fun. If that's not your thing then don't bother. Don't buy it because it can pussh oh so many polygons, or because it displays graphics the like of which have never been seen before!
I mean if a new game came along, that offered interaction like never before, with thousands of items that cn be picked up and examined, with thousands of locations that could be explored, would you buy it on this alone?
Only if you were stupid!
If the game also boasted the opportunity to make the beds of old people, and help then in and out of the bath, would it really interest you?
Honestly, if Sim Old Folks Home had the best graphics ever, and had a great level of characrter interaction, would you be interested? Would you want to wipe an old mans bum, perfectly rounded, with every hair and pimple modelled to perfection? Amazing! You can manage the medication too! Make sure you give each patient the right dose, or you'll be calling the undertaker in the morning! Would you really want to play it?
Or would you rather play Tetris?
The thing is there are still amazing games out there. Games that do offer truelly original concepts. Games that are still fun to play. Technology hasn't harmed gaming, it's making it better.
It's big business these days, you've just got to know where to look for the decent games, and don't go on about there being nothing worth playing out there. I'm still having fun, so should you be.
Sorry, I take it back then.....
I thought I was talking to Wedone?....
Who are you?......
I thought I was talking to Wedone?....
Who are you?......
LoL, Thank you, freind..., although i'm Game, not Wedone! I don't think he's here... :D :D :D!
Wedone!
Wahooooo! Thanks, folks!
Hey, this topic is so true.
For me, good graphics aren't about how technically impressive they are, but about how effectively they do their job. The special stage graphics from Sonic 3 are still 3D but the models are really bad. That doesn't make them bad graphics as you can still se what's going on, but if the graphics were super-smooth with realistic textures, they wouldn't be any better because they don't show what's going on any better.
OK then, take an FPS. I'd rather have a high framerate and pants detail than amazing detail and a low framerate, because the higher framerate is better at doing the job of the graphics.
Anyway, graphics don't make a game. Take Monkey Island 4 for PS2. It has some of the worst graphics on the console, but it looks really really nice and does the job. It's also a fantastic game, proving it doesn't matter how many polygons it can push.
The problem is, we don't care about graphics but an awful lot of magazines and the general public do. How many times has a game been "let down by graphics"? Also, why are companies like Nvida making such a bomb on their graphics chipsets?
These next-gen console's power is currently beeing used to make games as pretty as possible, but I hope that soon they'll start using the power for more pratical purposes such as AI and physics (*cough* MGS2 *cough*).
OK then, take an FPS. I'd rather have a high framerate and pants detail than amazing detail and a low framerate, because the higher framerate is better at doing the job of the graphics.
Anyway, graphics don't make a game. Take Monkey Island 4 for PS2. It has some of the worst graphics on the console, but it looks really really nice and does the job. It's also a fantastic game, proving it doesn't matter how many polygons it can push.
The problem is, we don't care about graphics but an awful lot of magazines and the general public do. How many times has a game been "let down by graphics"? Also, why are companies like Nvida making such a bomb on their graphics chipsets?
These next-gen console's power is currently beeing used to make games as pretty as possible, but I hope that soon they'll start using the power for more pratical purposes such as AI and physics (*cough* MGS2 *cough*).
I never take reviews serious. They are a guideline to the good and the poor in my view. A review for Outrigger I read go on;y 69% because it was "shallow". To me the game is all I wan't, a fresh FPS with plenty of action and fun. I am currently saving up to buy it.
When did I realise that reviews aren't the bottom line when it cmes to games? Well a few years ago I walked into a games shop and blindly picked out Soul Reaver. I got it home and found it to be one of the best games I had played in a long time. I found some reviews of it after and it was picking up scores of about 6/10. Normaly I would have steared well clear of games in that score range but I really enjoyed SR.
When did I realise that reviews aren't the bottom line when it cmes to games? Well a few years ago I walked into a games shop and blindly picked out Soul Reaver. I got it home and found it to be one of the best games I had played in a long time. I found some reviews of it after and it was picking up scores of about 6/10. Normaly I would have steared well clear of games in that score range but I really enjoyed SR.
There's nothing worse than a game with good graphics and poor gameplay; yet also good gameplay can be spoiled by weak and badly executed graphics.
For me, graphics and gameplay are of equal importance. To a certain extent I have to be able to believe in the gameworld, but ultimately it's the gameplay that dictates whether a game stands or falls.
You also mention "a slump in gaming" - it's a pretty popular slump.
For me, graphics and gameplay are of equal importance. To a certain extent I have to be able to believe in the gameworld, but ultimately it's the gameplay that dictates whether a game stands or falls.
You also mention "a slump in gaming" - it's a pretty popular slump.
Page: