The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
More and more do I notice how games are starting to value graphics over gameplay. Take Metal Gear Solid 2, a huge dissapointment for most gamers who owned or played the original and had long awaited it's return to the Playstation. What they got, was a game that played like a film. Or rather, hardly played at all.
I sat through it all, obviously. Not that that's saying much, I completed it in 6 hours on Medium, which is good by my standards as I have trouble completing most games outside the sport genre. It's not to say that it wasn't a pleasure to watch, by all means, it was, but we buy games to play them, and at £39.99 a hit we don't want to be getting a DVD.
And it's not just games. Take cases for instance, where you can now pay £79.99 for a PC Case. It does nothing, really. It's like a storage box. With flashing lights. Now, I pay about a tenner for a pack of three at Ikea, so I thought it must do something pretty good to warranty that price tag. And does it? Well, yes. It has a little flap that covers your CD / DVD drives. A plastic flap. And rails, to hold them. Oh and it's big too. So what do you get for £80? A piece of plastic, an empty metal box with rails and some space. Great value for money.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. I'm just saying wouldn't it be better if it was more functional. If it was cheaper. If the best qualities weren't that it has a little flap but that it has some other clever function. Like being simpler to install to.
The strangest thing to me is people are more than willing to pay £50+ for a case. They write reviews like "Oh, it's so wonderful, the lights on the front are brilliant." Umm... Hello? Lights on a metal case cost fifty quid? I don't think so.
It is enough to have gameplay alone. If any game proves this, it's Vib Ribbon for the PSone. A hugely clever game, where it analyzes a music CD and creates a ribbon with different twists, spikes and gaps, which you navigated simply by pressing one of the four buttons, x for twist, o for spike etc. The graphics weren't more than a few white lines on a black background. Wonderful.
These days, most games are looking for a balance, but are they finding them? EA BIG have probably been one of the best at this, with their Street series' and SSX & Co. They are all beautiful and have great gameplay. They found a good balance, and excellent sales and reputation reflect this. Another game to mention are the Tony Hawks series, which betters itself everytime, with some of the smoothest graphics. Once again, it's sold great both here and in the US, telling us they must be doing something right.
Thesedays, you find less and less creation, less and less ideas. EA have now installed an "off-the ball system" whereby you tap L2 to select a player, then press and hold square to pass. Now this works great, but it also worked great on Madden. Soon all EA games will be the same games just with different pitches and players.
This annoys me, having not been around to witness first hand much of the real originality of games. I started with the N64. Some really original games then, the Zelda series was, obviously one of the best, Banjo Kazooie, Perfect Dark and a handful of others. Then it all went wrong with the GameCube. Once again, this has been reflected in a dejected outlook from the Nintendo faithful. The graphics are nice, but they are just as nice on the PS2 or XBox. That's the problem. Multi-platform games are squeezing out every last penny out of every idea, and other games can no longer afford to be original. The sole place for people to look to for originality is, unsurprisingly, Japan.
Japan, home of Hideo Kojima, the brain behind MGS2, home of Nintendo, home of, well, everything. Nearly. It's recent original games have been solely for the Eastern market, just like Animal Crossing. Back in the days of N64, I had great expectations for the products at the end of the N64, Nintendo promising a whole host of games before switching to the GameCube completly. Instead, gamers saw release dates slipping like sand between their fingers, and soon all the titles were labeled "GC".
The GameCube itself is an example of just how much the game industry values it's image, as it strived to make itself smaller, cuter, another feature close to the heart of the Eastern market. If, it had, instead of trying to look nice, focused on creating a console that tended to a gamers need, it would undoubtedly have done better over here. It could have used CD's, rendering the GameCube an istant multi-functional machine, as it could play DVD's. Why the GameCube chose to have smaller disc I have no idea, but it seems pretty pointless to me, as all they've done is missed the all important edge that both the XBox and PS2 now have on it.
But looking good doesn't really seem to be a big issue for the XBox. A console the size of my freezer isn't going to make people stop and say, "Gee, ain't that the cutest thing ever?" No, and you know why? Because it was made in America. They don't give a thing whether or not their console looks good, they place importance in the money, and the games. See, with both the XBox and the PS2, you get a lot more for your money, as you're effectively getting a very good DVD player with each of them, which, with the GC, you would have to shell out again, maybe up to £150.
But then people will sacrifice money for looks, as is all the more apparent in todays culture. Everything must look good, you, your house, your room, your car, your TV, your kitchen... I could go on for hours. It's all important. People will pay thousands to whiten their teeth or get plastic surgery, and that's effectively what the games market is doing, getting a makeover. No more "raw" power, it now has to be in the bonnet of something refined, beautiful even. No more Vib Ribbon, either.
What the games industry must understand, is, like I am always being told, is that it needs balance. A balance between graphics and gamplay, a balance between looks and functions. It needs to support projects who perhaps don't look so hot, perhaps have a few more ideas to bring to the market, not the big EA companies, simply snapping up rights left right and center, making everything carbon copies. Only then will originality start to come back to the market.
I sat through it all, obviously. Not that that's saying much, I completed it in 6 hours on Medium, which is good by my standards as I have trouble completing most games outside the sport genre. It's not to say that it wasn't a pleasure to watch, by all means, it was, but we buy games to play them, and at £39.99 a hit we don't want to be getting a DVD.
And it's not just games. Take cases for instance, where you can now pay £79.99 for a PC Case. It does nothing, really. It's like a storage box. With flashing lights. Now, I pay about a tenner for a pack of three at Ikea, so I thought it must do something pretty good to warranty that price tag. And does it? Well, yes. It has a little flap that covers your CD / DVD drives. A plastic flap. And rails, to hold them. Oh and it's big too. So what do you get for £80? A piece of plastic, an empty metal box with rails and some space. Great value for money.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. I'm just saying wouldn't it be better if it was more functional. If it was cheaper. If the best qualities weren't that it has a little flap but that it has some other clever function. Like being simpler to install to.
The strangest thing to me is people are more than willing to pay £50+ for a case. They write reviews like "Oh, it's so wonderful, the lights on the front are brilliant." Umm... Hello? Lights on a metal case cost fifty quid? I don't think so.
It is enough to have gameplay alone. If any game proves this, it's Vib Ribbon for the PSone. A hugely clever game, where it analyzes a music CD and creates a ribbon with different twists, spikes and gaps, which you navigated simply by pressing one of the four buttons, x for twist, o for spike etc. The graphics weren't more than a few white lines on a black background. Wonderful.
These days, most games are looking for a balance, but are they finding them? EA BIG have probably been one of the best at this, with their Street series' and SSX & Co. They are all beautiful and have great gameplay. They found a good balance, and excellent sales and reputation reflect this. Another game to mention are the Tony Hawks series, which betters itself everytime, with some of the smoothest graphics. Once again, it's sold great both here and in the US, telling us they must be doing something right.
Thesedays, you find less and less creation, less and less ideas. EA have now installed an "off-the ball system" whereby you tap L2 to select a player, then press and hold square to pass. Now this works great, but it also worked great on Madden. Soon all EA games will be the same games just with different pitches and players.
This annoys me, having not been around to witness first hand much of the real originality of games. I started with the N64. Some really original games then, the Zelda series was, obviously one of the best, Banjo Kazooie, Perfect Dark and a handful of others. Then it all went wrong with the GameCube. Once again, this has been reflected in a dejected outlook from the Nintendo faithful. The graphics are nice, but they are just as nice on the PS2 or XBox. That's the problem. Multi-platform games are squeezing out every last penny out of every idea, and other games can no longer afford to be original. The sole place for people to look to for originality is, unsurprisingly, Japan.
Japan, home of Hideo Kojima, the brain behind MGS2, home of Nintendo, home of, well, everything. Nearly. It's recent original games have been solely for the Eastern market, just like Animal Crossing. Back in the days of N64, I had great expectations for the products at the end of the N64, Nintendo promising a whole host of games before switching to the GameCube completly. Instead, gamers saw release dates slipping like sand between their fingers, and soon all the titles were labeled "GC".
The GameCube itself is an example of just how much the game industry values it's image, as it strived to make itself smaller, cuter, another feature close to the heart of the Eastern market. If, it had, instead of trying to look nice, focused on creating a console that tended to a gamers need, it would undoubtedly have done better over here. It could have used CD's, rendering the GameCube an istant multi-functional machine, as it could play DVD's. Why the GameCube chose to have smaller disc I have no idea, but it seems pretty pointless to me, as all they've done is missed the all important edge that both the XBox and PS2 now have on it.
But looking good doesn't really seem to be a big issue for the XBox. A console the size of my freezer isn't going to make people stop and say, "Gee, ain't that the cutest thing ever?" No, and you know why? Because it was made in America. They don't give a thing whether or not their console looks good, they place importance in the money, and the games. See, with both the XBox and the PS2, you get a lot more for your money, as you're effectively getting a very good DVD player with each of them, which, with the GC, you would have to shell out again, maybe up to £150.
But then people will sacrifice money for looks, as is all the more apparent in todays culture. Everything must look good, you, your house, your room, your car, your TV, your kitchen... I could go on for hours. It's all important. People will pay thousands to whiten their teeth or get plastic surgery, and that's effectively what the games market is doing, getting a makeover. No more "raw" power, it now has to be in the bonnet of something refined, beautiful even. No more Vib Ribbon, either.
What the games industry must understand, is, like I am always being told, is that it needs balance. A balance between graphics and gamplay, a balance between looks and functions. It needs to support projects who perhaps don't look so hot, perhaps have a few more ideas to bring to the market, not the big EA companies, simply snapping up rights left right and center, making everything carbon copies. Only then will originality start to come back to the market.
More and more do I notice how games are starting to value graphics over gameplay. Take Metal Gear Solid 2, a huge dissapointment for most gamers who owned or played the original and had long awaited it's return to the Playstation. What they got, was a game that played like a film. Or rather, hardly played at all.
I sat through it all, obviously. Not that that's saying much, I completed it in 6 hours on Medium, which is good by my standards as I have trouble completing most games outside the sport genre. It's not to say that it wasn't a pleasure to watch, by all means, it was, but we buy games to play them, and at £39.99 a hit we don't want to be getting a DVD.
And it's not just games. Take cases for instance, where you can now pay £79.99 for a PC Case. It does nothing, really. It's like a storage box. With flashing lights. Now, I pay about a tenner for a pack of three at Ikea, so I thought it must do something pretty good to warranty that price tag. And does it? Well, yes. It has a little flap that covers your CD / DVD drives. A plastic flap. And rails, to hold them. Oh and it's big too. So what do you get for £80? A piece of plastic, an empty metal box with rails and some space. Great value for money.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. I'm just saying wouldn't it be better if it was more functional. If it was cheaper. If the best qualities weren't that it has a little flap but that it has some other clever function. Like being simpler to install to.
The strangest thing to me is people are more than willing to pay £50+ for a case. They write reviews like "Oh, it's so wonderful, the lights on the front are brilliant." Umm... Hello? Lights on a metal case cost fifty quid? I don't think so.
It is enough to have gameplay alone. If any game proves this, it's Vib Ribbon for the PSone. A hugely clever game, where it analyzes a music CD and creates a ribbon with different twists, spikes and gaps, which you navigated simply by pressing one of the four buttons, x for twist, o for spike etc. The graphics weren't more than a few white lines on a black background. Wonderful.
These days, most games are looking for a balance, but are they finding them? EA BIG have probably been one of the best at this, with their Street series' and SSX & Co. They are all beautiful and have great gameplay. They found a good balance, and excellent sales and reputation reflect this. Another game to mention are the Tony Hawks series, which betters itself everytime, with some of the smoothest graphics. Once again, it's sold great both here and in the US, telling us they must be doing something right.
Thesedays, you find less and less creation, less and less ideas. EA have now installed an "off-the ball system" whereby you tap L2 to select a player, then press and hold square to pass. Now this works great, but it also worked great on Madden. Soon all EA games will be the same games just with different pitches and players.
This annoys me, having not been around to witness first hand much of the real originality of games. I started with the N64. Some really original games then, the Zelda series was, obviously one of the best, Banjo Kazooie, Perfect Dark and a handful of others. Then it all went wrong with the GameCube. Once again, this has been reflected in a dejected outlook from the Nintendo faithful. The graphics are nice, but they are just as nice on the PS2 or XBox. That's the problem. Multi-platform games are squeezing out every last penny out of every idea, and other games can no longer afford to be original. The sole place for people to look to for originality is, unsurprisingly, Japan.
Japan, home of Hideo Kojima, the brain behind MGS2, home of Nintendo, home of, well, everything. Nearly. It's recent original games have been solely for the Eastern market, just like Animal Crossing. Back in the days of N64, I had great expectations for the products at the end of the N64, Nintendo promising a whole host of games before switching to the GameCube completly. Instead, gamers saw release dates slipping like sand between their fingers, and soon all the titles were labeled "GC".
The GameCube itself is an example of just how much the game industry values it's image, as it strived to make itself smaller, cuter, another feature close to the heart of the Eastern market. If, it had, instead of trying to look nice, focused on creating a console that tended to a gamers need, it would undoubtedly have done better over here. It could have used CD's, rendering the GameCube an istant multi-functional machine, as it could play DVD's. Why the GameCube chose to have smaller disc I have no idea, but it seems pretty pointless to me, as all they've done is missed the all important edge that both the XBox and PS2 now have on it.
But looking good doesn't really seem to be a big issue for the XBox. A console the size of my freezer isn't going to make people stop and say, "Gee, ain't that the cutest thing ever?" No, and you know why? Because it was made in America. They don't give a thing whether or not their console looks good, they place importance in the money, and the games. See, with both the XBox and the PS2, you get a lot more for your money, as you're effectively getting a very good DVD player with each of them, which, with the GC, you would have to shell out again, maybe up to £150.
But then people will sacrifice money for looks, as is all the more apparent in todays culture. Everything must look good, you, your house, your room, your car, your TV, your kitchen... I could go on for hours. It's all important. People will pay thousands to whiten their teeth or get plastic surgery, and that's effectively what the games market is doing, getting a makeover. No more "raw" power, it now has to be in the bonnet of something refined, beautiful even. No more Vib Ribbon, either.
What the games industry must understand, is, like I am always being told, is that it needs balance. A balance between graphics and gamplay, a balance between looks and functions. It needs to support projects who perhaps don't look so hot, perhaps have a few more ideas to bring to the market, not the big EA companies, simply snapping up rights left right and center, making everything carbon copies. Only then will originality start to come back to the market.
I sat through it all, obviously. Not that that's saying much, I completed it in 6 hours on Medium, which is good by my standards as I have trouble completing most games outside the sport genre. It's not to say that it wasn't a pleasure to watch, by all means, it was, but we buy games to play them, and at £39.99 a hit we don't want to be getting a DVD.
And it's not just games. Take cases for instance, where you can now pay £79.99 for a PC Case. It does nothing, really. It's like a storage box. With flashing lights. Now, I pay about a tenner for a pack of three at Ikea, so I thought it must do something pretty good to warranty that price tag. And does it? Well, yes. It has a little flap that covers your CD / DVD drives. A plastic flap. And rails, to hold them. Oh and it's big too. So what do you get for £80? A piece of plastic, an empty metal box with rails and some space. Great value for money.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. I'm just saying wouldn't it be better if it was more functional. If it was cheaper. If the best qualities weren't that it has a little flap but that it has some other clever function. Like being simpler to install to.
The strangest thing to me is people are more than willing to pay £50+ for a case. They write reviews like "Oh, it's so wonderful, the lights on the front are brilliant." Umm... Hello? Lights on a metal case cost fifty quid? I don't think so.
It is enough to have gameplay alone. If any game proves this, it's Vib Ribbon for the PSone. A hugely clever game, where it analyzes a music CD and creates a ribbon with different twists, spikes and gaps, which you navigated simply by pressing one of the four buttons, x for twist, o for spike etc. The graphics weren't more than a few white lines on a black background. Wonderful.
These days, most games are looking for a balance, but are they finding them? EA BIG have probably been one of the best at this, with their Street series' and SSX & Co. They are all beautiful and have great gameplay. They found a good balance, and excellent sales and reputation reflect this. Another game to mention are the Tony Hawks series, which betters itself everytime, with some of the smoothest graphics. Once again, it's sold great both here and in the US, telling us they must be doing something right.
Thesedays, you find less and less creation, less and less ideas. EA have now installed an "off-the ball system" whereby you tap L2 to select a player, then press and hold square to pass. Now this works great, but it also worked great on Madden. Soon all EA games will be the same games just with different pitches and players.
This annoys me, having not been around to witness first hand much of the real originality of games. I started with the N64. Some really original games then, the Zelda series was, obviously one of the best, Banjo Kazooie, Perfect Dark and a handful of others. Then it all went wrong with the GameCube. Once again, this has been reflected in a dejected outlook from the Nintendo faithful. The graphics are nice, but they are just as nice on the PS2 or XBox. That's the problem. Multi-platform games are squeezing out every last penny out of every idea, and other games can no longer afford to be original. The sole place for people to look to for originality is, unsurprisingly, Japan.
Japan, home of Hideo Kojima, the brain behind MGS2, home of Nintendo, home of, well, everything. Nearly. It's recent original games have been solely for the Eastern market, just like Animal Crossing. Back in the days of N64, I had great expectations for the products at the end of the N64, Nintendo promising a whole host of games before switching to the GameCube completly. Instead, gamers saw release dates slipping like sand between their fingers, and soon all the titles were labeled "GC".
The GameCube itself is an example of just how much the game industry values it's image, as it strived to make itself smaller, cuter, another feature close to the heart of the Eastern market. If, it had, instead of trying to look nice, focused on creating a console that tended to a gamers need, it would undoubtedly have done better over here. It could have used CD's, rendering the GameCube an istant multi-functional machine, as it could play DVD's. Why the GameCube chose to have smaller disc I have no idea, but it seems pretty pointless to me, as all they've done is missed the all important edge that both the XBox and PS2 now have on it.
But looking good doesn't really seem to be a big issue for the XBox. A console the size of my freezer isn't going to make people stop and say, "Gee, ain't that the cutest thing ever?" No, and you know why? Because it was made in America. They don't give a thing whether or not their console looks good, they place importance in the money, and the games. See, with both the XBox and the PS2, you get a lot more for your money, as you're effectively getting a very good DVD player with each of them, which, with the GC, you would have to shell out again, maybe up to £150.
But then people will sacrifice money for looks, as is all the more apparent in todays culture. Everything must look good, you, your house, your room, your car, your TV, your kitchen... I could go on for hours. It's all important. People will pay thousands to whiten their teeth or get plastic surgery, and that's effectively what the games market is doing, getting a makeover. No more "raw" power, it now has to be in the bonnet of something refined, beautiful even. No more Vib Ribbon, either.
What the games industry must understand, is, like I am always being told, is that it needs balance. A balance between graphics and gamplay, a balance between looks and functions. It needs to support projects who perhaps don't look so hot, perhaps have a few more ideas to bring to the market, not the big EA companies, simply snapping up rights left right and center, making everything carbon copies. Only then will originality start to come back to the market.
Messy wrote:
> And it's not just games. Take cases for instance, where you can now
> pay £79.99 for a PC Case. It does nothing, really. It's like a
> storage box. With flashing lights. Now, I pay about a tenner for a
> pack of three at Ikea, so I thought it must do something pretty good
> to warranty that price tag. And does it? Well, yes. It has a little
> flap that covers your CD / DVD drives. A plastic flap. And rails, to
> hold them. Oh and it's big too. So what do you get for £80? A
> piece of plastic, an empty metal box with rails and some space. Great
> value for money.
EXCATLY! I've had my PC for around 3 or 4 years now I suppose. In that time I've had numerous new graphics cards, dvd drives, sound card, RAM, fans, etc, etc. But, the two bits have remained the same; the keyboard (which by now is full of crumbs, muck and scuzz, and once had a can of beer spilt over it), and the ugly old case.
Yep, I've had the same horrid old beige case forever, but I see now reason to change it. Why bother spending loads of cash on cases and flashy case mods?
It looks ugly and old, but it's what's inside that counts, which I suppose is like gameplay versus graphics in games.
> The GameCube itself is an example of just how much the game industry
> values it's image, as it strived to make itself smaller, cuter,
> another feature close to the heart of the Eastern market. If, it had,
> instead of trying to look nice, focused on creating a console that
> tended to a gamers need, it would undoubtedly have done better over
> here. It could have used CD's, rendering the GameCube an istant
> multi-functional machine, as it could play DVD's. Why the GameCube
> chose to have smaller disc I have no idea, but it seems pretty
> pointless to me, as all they've done is missed the all important edge
> that both the XBox and PS2 now have on it.
I agree that Nintendo missed an opportunity to provide dvd playing capabilities with the Gamecube, but I understand that using the smaller discs was an anti-piracy measure and maybe something to do with being able to charge companies royalties or something. Anyway, I don't think it's doing too badly over here (though I think they should have released the Q everywhere if they could have done).
I do think that for the majority of games nowadays, it is a case of style over substance. Games are mostly superficial, even some of the Nintendo ones because they have to cater to the knuckle dragging, drooling, numbskull masses, who favour "wicked graficks" over any gameplay whatsoever.
I can think back to the SNES and N64 eras and think about games like Mario Kart, GoldenEye, Secret of Mana, etc with misty eyed nostalgia, but it's not just rose tinted eye syndrome, they are better games than many of the ones being made today. I spent years playing Mana, levelling up my chracters and each of their weapons, my brother and I would fight through the last dungeon (the Mana Fortress) right to near the end, then we'd fight our way back out again, just for fun. We don't do that anymore with modern games.
My younger brother, despite having a Gamecube and access to an Xbox, PS2 and PC, is playing through an emulator of Mana. I had to nearly threaten to use physical violence on him to try out the fantastic Prince of Perisa. But he was that enthralled by an old game that he didn't want to give PoP a chance.
GoldenEye deathmatches; they didn't look amazing, but they gave me hundreds of hours of entertainment. And SNES Mario Kart is still better than the N64 or GC ones, I don't care what anyone says.
Games in the old days couldn't rely on flashy graphics to hide their gameplay inadequacies, but now they can. Games like MGS2 as you mention, can look amazing, but be seriously flawed in the actual gameplay department, and so many film tie-ins come out with nice visuals, but stinky gameplay.
I do still have hope. I recently got around to completing the last few hours of The Wind Waker and enjoyed Prince of Persia, so while there's still games like that around, gameplay will be able to live side by side with pretty visuals.
> And it's not just games. Take cases for instance, where you can now
> pay £79.99 for a PC Case. It does nothing, really. It's like a
> storage box. With flashing lights. Now, I pay about a tenner for a
> pack of three at Ikea, so I thought it must do something pretty good
> to warranty that price tag. And does it? Well, yes. It has a little
> flap that covers your CD / DVD drives. A plastic flap. And rails, to
> hold them. Oh and it's big too. So what do you get for £80? A
> piece of plastic, an empty metal box with rails and some space. Great
> value for money.
EXCATLY! I've had my PC for around 3 or 4 years now I suppose. In that time I've had numerous new graphics cards, dvd drives, sound card, RAM, fans, etc, etc. But, the two bits have remained the same; the keyboard (which by now is full of crumbs, muck and scuzz, and once had a can of beer spilt over it), and the ugly old case.
Yep, I've had the same horrid old beige case forever, but I see now reason to change it. Why bother spending loads of cash on cases and flashy case mods?
It looks ugly and old, but it's what's inside that counts, which I suppose is like gameplay versus graphics in games.
> The GameCube itself is an example of just how much the game industry
> values it's image, as it strived to make itself smaller, cuter,
> another feature close to the heart of the Eastern market. If, it had,
> instead of trying to look nice, focused on creating a console that
> tended to a gamers need, it would undoubtedly have done better over
> here. It could have used CD's, rendering the GameCube an istant
> multi-functional machine, as it could play DVD's. Why the GameCube
> chose to have smaller disc I have no idea, but it seems pretty
> pointless to me, as all they've done is missed the all important edge
> that both the XBox and PS2 now have on it.
I agree that Nintendo missed an opportunity to provide dvd playing capabilities with the Gamecube, but I understand that using the smaller discs was an anti-piracy measure and maybe something to do with being able to charge companies royalties or something. Anyway, I don't think it's doing too badly over here (though I think they should have released the Q everywhere if they could have done).
I do think that for the majority of games nowadays, it is a case of style over substance. Games are mostly superficial, even some of the Nintendo ones because they have to cater to the knuckle dragging, drooling, numbskull masses, who favour "wicked graficks" over any gameplay whatsoever.
I can think back to the SNES and N64 eras and think about games like Mario Kart, GoldenEye, Secret of Mana, etc with misty eyed nostalgia, but it's not just rose tinted eye syndrome, they are better games than many of the ones being made today. I spent years playing Mana, levelling up my chracters and each of their weapons, my brother and I would fight through the last dungeon (the Mana Fortress) right to near the end, then we'd fight our way back out again, just for fun. We don't do that anymore with modern games.
My younger brother, despite having a Gamecube and access to an Xbox, PS2 and PC, is playing through an emulator of Mana. I had to nearly threaten to use physical violence on him to try out the fantastic Prince of Perisa. But he was that enthralled by an old game that he didn't want to give PoP a chance.
GoldenEye deathmatches; they didn't look amazing, but they gave me hundreds of hours of entertainment. And SNES Mario Kart is still better than the N64 or GC ones, I don't care what anyone says.
Games in the old days couldn't rely on flashy graphics to hide their gameplay inadequacies, but now they can. Games like MGS2 as you mention, can look amazing, but be seriously flawed in the actual gameplay department, and so many film tie-ins come out with nice visuals, but stinky gameplay.
I do still have hope. I recently got around to completing the last few hours of The Wind Waker and enjoyed Prince of Persia, so while there's still games like that around, gameplay will be able to live side by side with pretty visuals.
When i make a game i think sod the graphics lets just make a good game.
Who cares about graphics when you got pure gameplay
Who cares about graphics when you got pure gameplay
Thats because your one man buck your exactly gonna make a gamecube game with just you.
Also you said you were going to improve on graphics in your next game using flash.
Also you said you were going to improve on graphics in your next game using flash.
Buck1 wrote:
> When i make a game i think sod the graphics lets just make a good
> game.
> Who cares about graphics when you got pure gameplay
You won't be able to decide; it's ultimately the publishers - if they want to change something in your game in order to secure a deal, 90% of the time developers would do it.
And do you *still* think that the average game programmer earns at least £100k?
> When i make a game i think sod the graphics lets just make a good
> game.
> Who cares about graphics when you got pure gameplay
You won't be able to decide; it's ultimately the publishers - if they want to change something in your game in order to secure a deal, 90% of the time developers would do it.
And do you *still* think that the average game programmer earns at least £100k?
Sorry Messy, but you've got the GameCube completely wrong.
Oh, and a sequel to Vib Ribbon has been confirmed.
"Mojib Ribbon".
"Mojib Ribbon".
Dakarus Joe wrote:
> Thats because your one man buck your exactly gonna make a gamecube
> game with just you.
> Also you said you were going to improve on graphics in your next game
> using flash.
Yes i did say that but.....
*thinks of an excuse*
its hard work and takes time
> Thats because your one man buck your exactly gonna make a gamecube
> game with just you.
> Also you said you were going to improve on graphics in your next game
> using flash.
Yes i did say that but.....
*thinks of an excuse*
its hard work and takes time
Whoever wrote this topic wrote:
"Umm... Hello? Lights on a metal case cost fifty quid? I don't think so."
Hahaha, I like it. Common Sense
The whole Graphics over Gameplay debate has been raging for years, even before Meka Dragon became a Jedi. I don't think Graphics have harmed gameplay in any way. Rather enhanced it. I mean, look as Splinter Cell 2. Fisher uses shadows, Enemies see your torch lights. Granted, in FPS's and Sports games for example, it just adds to the bling or the pizzaz, but more in adventure games, especially after the transition from 2D to 3D, gameplay has moved on, quite considerably.
In some games, graphics won't have much effect at all. Look at The Sims. It's a popular game, more-so with girls (probably because you tell people what to do), but it only needs to look so good. You need to make out the people and the places, and you're away. who cares that your burning oven, or burning fiance doesn't produce real-time lighting, that there's no bump-mapping on your kids teenage acne, or that Nan's Newspaper isn't updated Via XBOX Live, or PC Live, or whatever.
Nintendo do have the right idea, contrary to popular thinking. Graphics are fine the way they are. If developers can churn out games like Metroid Prime, Starfox, Halo (CE/2), Splinter Cell and Sly Raccoon, we have seen enough. They. Don't. Need. To. Change. But want and need are by no means the same thing. If it's available we want it. The graphics in the FPS Halo 2, uncommonly, could improve the gameplay to a significant degree, thanks to the sprites of talent that make up Bungie Studios, but this isn't the case for a lot of games. In most FPS's, you see a bad guy, shoot first, never ask questions. I've gone over Halo with a fine-tooth comb, and aside from a few frame-rate issues, some floating boulders on AOTCR, a lone Marine on 343GS, and a schizophrenic Grunt on The Maw, there is nothing that could relax the gameplay or enjoyment to such any major degree.
Graphics Vs Gameplay was never really an issue. Developers have always known they need a good game to sell copies. Nowadays, It's more Graphics and Gameplay Vs Ageing Ideas and Lesser Innovation.
Game
"Umm... Hello? Lights on a metal case cost fifty quid? I don't think so."
Hahaha, I like it. Common Sense
The whole Graphics over Gameplay debate has been raging for years, even before Meka Dragon became a Jedi. I don't think Graphics have harmed gameplay in any way. Rather enhanced it. I mean, look as Splinter Cell 2. Fisher uses shadows, Enemies see your torch lights. Granted, in FPS's and Sports games for example, it just adds to the bling or the pizzaz, but more in adventure games, especially after the transition from 2D to 3D, gameplay has moved on, quite considerably.
In some games, graphics won't have much effect at all. Look at The Sims. It's a popular game, more-so with girls (probably because you tell people what to do), but it only needs to look so good. You need to make out the people and the places, and you're away. who cares that your burning oven, or burning fiance doesn't produce real-time lighting, that there's no bump-mapping on your kids teenage acne, or that Nan's Newspaper isn't updated Via XBOX Live, or PC Live, or whatever.
Nintendo do have the right idea, contrary to popular thinking. Graphics are fine the way they are. If developers can churn out games like Metroid Prime, Starfox, Halo (CE/2), Splinter Cell and Sly Raccoon, we have seen enough. They. Don't. Need. To. Change. But want and need are by no means the same thing. If it's available we want it. The graphics in the FPS Halo 2, uncommonly, could improve the gameplay to a significant degree, thanks to the sprites of talent that make up Bungie Studios, but this isn't the case for a lot of games. In most FPS's, you see a bad guy, shoot first, never ask questions. I've gone over Halo with a fine-tooth comb, and aside from a few frame-rate issues, some floating boulders on AOTCR, a lone Marine on 343GS, and a schizophrenic Grunt on The Maw, there is nothing that could relax the gameplay or enjoyment to such any major degree.
Graphics Vs Gameplay was never really an issue. Developers have always known they need a good game to sell copies. Nowadays, It's more Graphics and Gameplay Vs Ageing Ideas and Lesser Innovation.
Game