The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Reading the recent retro freaks magazine Games TM the fear that Nintendo have lost it dawned on me. Here was a magazine that criticised everything the Gamecube had to offer, showing SNES games claiming “This is what Nintendo used to be about”. They weren’t anti-Nintendo although definitely pro-X-box they were disappointed as yet another Mario Kart game fails to beat it’s predecessors.
There appears to be two schools of criticisms, one that Nintendo have changed their lead franchises too much (mainly the die-hard fan base) and two that Nintendo are no longer fresh and new (mainly the opposition fans). Both totally contradictory in terms and so one is wrong, well no actually they are both wrong.
In a society obsessed with comparison it is no surprise Nintendo may appear to falter in its new generation. How can you say Super Mario Sunshine doesn’t surpass Super Mario 64? “Easy” I’m told “the game does nothing new, it is shorter and lacks variation”. Eh? Are you trying to tell me that Mario Sunshine does nothing over Mario 64???? Mario 64 was a revolution, a stunning title that started this interactive 3D world and no one can begin to describe the effect this game had on the industry. BUT it wasn’t nearly as good as you remember it, you always look back through rose tinted glasses, games get better as time goes on. Sunshine was easily as fun as Mario 64 was, it may have had no ice level but we had an underwater section, a ghost house section. A lava segment and even a roller coaster level! Despite it being set on an island, which is another sign of Mario progressing from his traditional worlds, the game did consist of far more variety than first discussed. Then there is FLUDD, who is fantastic SIMPLY because of the depth it added to Mario’s own genre. Mario in platforming had a set height and length he could jump, the main challenge was defeating enemies. In Sunshine, Miyamoto invented a device that incorporated a host of new platforming moves and Mario’s weapon as well. It was a VERY good idea; set up with a perfect control system and once again he set up millions of puzzles to work with these new moves. It really was a revolution and a superior title to Mario 64!
But enough about how sunshine surpasses Mario 64 as a stand-alone game. I want to move onto my prime example of The Legend of Zelda. Zelda suffers from something I call give and take syndrome. In order to take the game needs to give. Lets take Ocarina of Time, a game everyone claims to be the best 3D Zelda game. Rubbish the best 3D Zelda game is Wind Waker and that is a fact. Ocarina of Time has the same magic as Wind Waker did, trust me IT DID it felt just as wonderful to play and I know it looks more magical now but compare playing the Wind Waker to playing Ocarina of time and you’ll remember they felt both just as good. But Wind Waker had problems, this is unusual, the sea journeys at times got tiresome, the interaction was very poor and the storyline wasn’t held together too well. But doesn’t a combat system to die for (so beautiful and amazing to control), the worlds best use of cel-shading graphics ever (so amazing) and a level of absolute hilarity make up for it? Doesn’t the ability to fly, the various use of the wind, the new cel-shaded look and the new idea of the sea make this a great example of how sequels should be done? Lets look at Majora’s Mask, doesn’t come close to Ocarina of time they said, and why? Well because of the smaller and less epic filled landscape, the easier dungeons, the crappy saving system and reduced length. But doesn’t the BEST EVER INTERACTION IN A ZELDA GAME make up for that (the 3 day loop is the most ingenious idea to date), doesn’t the gameplay improving and effective mask collecting out match Gold Skultula’s completely? Isn’t the atmosphere the darkest and most daunting in any Zelda game ever? Yes that is right, doing something-new, innovative and amazing means that something has to give in the game. A level of interaction like none other meant the developer was working solidly on that and so the story was reduced. So the interaction could work so well (character doing something different all the time) meant a set number of days were needed and to stop the game becoming too easy the “save anywhere” approach had to be removed…
So lets look at Ocarina of Time, yes it may have be the longest game, the most amazing storyline BUT the enemies were actually rather poor, Hyrule field is big barren and dull, we had to sit through that storyline regarding the 3 Gods TWICE and it was dull the first time and the game at times really felt like a dodgy puzzle game (the water temple)…
Nintendo have not lost it at all. Mario Kart: Double Dash!! is FAR better than Mario Kart 64 and Super Mario Kart. Nintendo have yet to create a masterpiece like they did on the N64 (and oh boy did they create some masterpieces) but they have managed to improve their old masterpieces with new and fresh ideas and take their series’ in other directions. Other than perhaps Metroid Prime Nintendo haven’t created a new game defining moment. This is true, despite their best attempts with Pikmin (give it time). But play the games… and stick with them and the magic is still there… in full force. Just remember the movement from 2D into 3D was always going to be more revolutionary than 3D into 3D… and after all for such a small jump Nintendo have managed to alter their best franchises in the most ingenious of ways.
Dringo.
There appears to be two schools of criticisms, one that Nintendo have changed their lead franchises too much (mainly the die-hard fan base) and two that Nintendo are no longer fresh and new (mainly the opposition fans). Both totally contradictory in terms and so one is wrong, well no actually they are both wrong.
In a society obsessed with comparison it is no surprise Nintendo may appear to falter in its new generation. How can you say Super Mario Sunshine doesn’t surpass Super Mario 64? “Easy” I’m told “the game does nothing new, it is shorter and lacks variation”. Eh? Are you trying to tell me that Mario Sunshine does nothing over Mario 64???? Mario 64 was a revolution, a stunning title that started this interactive 3D world and no one can begin to describe the effect this game had on the industry. BUT it wasn’t nearly as good as you remember it, you always look back through rose tinted glasses, games get better as time goes on. Sunshine was easily as fun as Mario 64 was, it may have had no ice level but we had an underwater section, a ghost house section. A lava segment and even a roller coaster level! Despite it being set on an island, which is another sign of Mario progressing from his traditional worlds, the game did consist of far more variety than first discussed. Then there is FLUDD, who is fantastic SIMPLY because of the depth it added to Mario’s own genre. Mario in platforming had a set height and length he could jump, the main challenge was defeating enemies. In Sunshine, Miyamoto invented a device that incorporated a host of new platforming moves and Mario’s weapon as well. It was a VERY good idea; set up with a perfect control system and once again he set up millions of puzzles to work with these new moves. It really was a revolution and a superior title to Mario 64!
But enough about how sunshine surpasses Mario 64 as a stand-alone game. I want to move onto my prime example of The Legend of Zelda. Zelda suffers from something I call give and take syndrome. In order to take the game needs to give. Lets take Ocarina of Time, a game everyone claims to be the best 3D Zelda game. Rubbish the best 3D Zelda game is Wind Waker and that is a fact. Ocarina of Time has the same magic as Wind Waker did, trust me IT DID it felt just as wonderful to play and I know it looks more magical now but compare playing the Wind Waker to playing Ocarina of time and you’ll remember they felt both just as good. But Wind Waker had problems, this is unusual, the sea journeys at times got tiresome, the interaction was very poor and the storyline wasn’t held together too well. But doesn’t a combat system to die for (so beautiful and amazing to control), the worlds best use of cel-shading graphics ever (so amazing) and a level of absolute hilarity make up for it? Doesn’t the ability to fly, the various use of the wind, the new cel-shaded look and the new idea of the sea make this a great example of how sequels should be done? Lets look at Majora’s Mask, doesn’t come close to Ocarina of time they said, and why? Well because of the smaller and less epic filled landscape, the easier dungeons, the crappy saving system and reduced length. But doesn’t the BEST EVER INTERACTION IN A ZELDA GAME make up for that (the 3 day loop is the most ingenious idea to date), doesn’t the gameplay improving and effective mask collecting out match Gold Skultula’s completely? Isn’t the atmosphere the darkest and most daunting in any Zelda game ever? Yes that is right, doing something-new, innovative and amazing means that something has to give in the game. A level of interaction like none other meant the developer was working solidly on that and so the story was reduced. So the interaction could work so well (character doing something different all the time) meant a set number of days were needed and to stop the game becoming too easy the “save anywhere” approach had to be removed…
So lets look at Ocarina of Time, yes it may have be the longest game, the most amazing storyline BUT the enemies were actually rather poor, Hyrule field is big barren and dull, we had to sit through that storyline regarding the 3 Gods TWICE and it was dull the first time and the game at times really felt like a dodgy puzzle game (the water temple)…
Nintendo have not lost it at all. Mario Kart: Double Dash!! is FAR better than Mario Kart 64 and Super Mario Kart. Nintendo have yet to create a masterpiece like they did on the N64 (and oh boy did they create some masterpieces) but they have managed to improve their old masterpieces with new and fresh ideas and take their series’ in other directions. Other than perhaps Metroid Prime Nintendo haven’t created a new game defining moment. This is true, despite their best attempts with Pikmin (give it time). But play the games… and stick with them and the magic is still there… in full force. Just remember the movement from 2D into 3D was always going to be more revolutionary than 3D into 3D… and after all for such a small jump Nintendo have managed to alter their best franchises in the most ingenious of ways.
Dringo.
Page:
The last 'epic' title I played on Xbox was Halo, which, well, I 'didn't like'.
I haven't played KOTOR, but it looks pretty damn 'epic'.
But I have played Skies Of Arcadia: Legends, Zelda: Wind Waker (what can be more 'epic' than sailing up to the Tower of the Gods with your camera moving ever so slowly down and around your boat?) and Metroid Prime, and even Eternal Darkness on the Gamecube.
So MOO!
I haven't played KOTOR, but it looks pretty damn 'epic'.
But I have played Skies Of Arcadia: Legends, Zelda: Wind Waker (what can be more 'epic' than sailing up to the Tower of the Gods with your camera moving ever so slowly down and around your boat?) and Metroid Prime, and even Eternal Darkness on the Gamecube.
So MOO!
Strafex wrote:
>> Yeah, the Xbox seems to becoming the best platform for epic titles.
> It seems that the N64's heritage split two ways, the Gamecube picking
> up on the "cheap fun" multiplayer like Mario Kart, Soccer
> Slam and Smash Brothers while the Xbox continued the Mario 64, Zelda
> 64 and Goldeneye lineage of blowing people away. Microsoft even
> bought Rare! :-D
Bloody hell I disagree with that. I must admit I am TEMPTED by the X-box... my dad has one and although I think nothing of Halo, Jet Set Radio: Future, grabbed by the Gholies and the up and coming Conker game looks absolutly fantastic.
BUT saying Nintendo have removed the epic games from their catalogue is just false. I mean granted to start with Nintendo were on troubled grounds with games that were short of multiplayer titles. But that is not the case now, Metroid Prime was an epic, Mario Sunshine WAS an epic and so was Wind Waker. Wind Waker in particular has the right to be there next to the other Zelda titles, sure it had its faults but it still had its epics.
I hope when you get to play the promotional Zelda disc you'll realise how far Nintendo have progressed in terms of the Zelda titles. But on a different note I guess you are referring to never played before genius from Nintendo. In that case Metroid Prime is certainly one, Eternal Darkness is, without a shadow of a doubt, one and regarding future titles look out for Pikmin. Trust me in this department.
>> Yeah, the Xbox seems to becoming the best platform for epic titles.
> It seems that the N64's heritage split two ways, the Gamecube picking
> up on the "cheap fun" multiplayer like Mario Kart, Soccer
> Slam and Smash Brothers while the Xbox continued the Mario 64, Zelda
> 64 and Goldeneye lineage of blowing people away. Microsoft even
> bought Rare! :-D
Bloody hell I disagree with that. I must admit I am TEMPTED by the X-box... my dad has one and although I think nothing of Halo, Jet Set Radio: Future, grabbed by the Gholies and the up and coming Conker game looks absolutly fantastic.
BUT saying Nintendo have removed the epic games from their catalogue is just false. I mean granted to start with Nintendo were on troubled grounds with games that were short of multiplayer titles. But that is not the case now, Metroid Prime was an epic, Mario Sunshine WAS an epic and so was Wind Waker. Wind Waker in particular has the right to be there next to the other Zelda titles, sure it had its faults but it still had its epics.
I hope when you get to play the promotional Zelda disc you'll realise how far Nintendo have progressed in terms of the Zelda titles. But on a different note I guess you are referring to never played before genius from Nintendo. In that case Metroid Prime is certainly one, Eternal Darkness is, without a shadow of a doubt, one and regarding future titles look out for Pikmin. Trust me in this department.
Strafex wrote:
> Even if his Nintendo fanaticism does sometimes make me wonder how
> brown his nose must be! ;-)
It is okay... I wash it.
I was playing Mario Sunshine the other day actually... definatly a heavy weight.
I'm right you're wrong :P
Wind Waker wasn't as epic in fell but come on you have to confess that game was a joy to play. I mean Sunshine falters because it didn't feel like a traditonal mario game according to some, but that does not make it just as fun. Perhaps that is where it falls down, Sunshine is just as fun as 64 BUT doesn't have the iconography we know and love... which damages the game.
As for Wind Waker, well ignore the fact some dungeons were missing, the sea journeys were a tad dull and the storyline was a bit vague... you have the same loveable Zelda characters, so much humour and a FANTASTIC control system... not to mention those graphics. Now this is one hell of a game. I guess it is what you truly want from a game.
> Even if his Nintendo fanaticism does sometimes make me wonder how
> brown his nose must be! ;-)
It is okay... I wash it.
I was playing Mario Sunshine the other day actually... definatly a heavy weight.
I'm right you're wrong :P
Wind Waker wasn't as epic in fell but come on you have to confess that game was a joy to play. I mean Sunshine falters because it didn't feel like a traditonal mario game according to some, but that does not make it just as fun. Perhaps that is where it falls down, Sunshine is just as fun as 64 BUT doesn't have the iconography we know and love... which damages the game.
As for Wind Waker, well ignore the fact some dungeons were missing, the sea journeys were a tad dull and the storyline was a bit vague... you have the same loveable Zelda characters, so much humour and a FANTASTIC control system... not to mention those graphics. Now this is one hell of a game. I guess it is what you truly want from a game.
There is no way one can even mention Halo in the same context as Goldeneye, Metroid Prime, Mario 64 etc.
Fer chrissakes, it simply relied on 'epic' fights (about as fast as a turte half asleep after a night out) and it was BORING!
ARRRR!
Fer chrissakes, it simply relied on 'epic' fights (about as fast as a turte half asleep after a night out) and it was BORING!
ARRRR!
Halo was nearly up there with OOT, Mario 64 and Goldeneye.
Just let down by some of the repetitive level design which made it really monotonous in places, which is a shame because in other places it was mind blowing.
And the multiplayer was the next step on from Perfect Dark, with the large outdoor arena's, and fun in vehicles.
It'll benefit from more players though.
Just let down by some of the repetitive level design which made it really monotonous in places, which is a shame because in other places it was mind blowing.
And the multiplayer was the next step on from Perfect Dark, with the large outdoor arena's, and fun in vehicles.
It'll benefit from more players though.
Edgy wrote:
> The thing is - Nintendo HAVE learnt from their mistakes and have
> released these excellent titles.
>
> HOWEVER...
>
> They're now making games that look and feel how the other popular
> games on other systems do.
Yeah. Watered down "Pop" titles.
The reason the hardcore N64 base liked them so much is because although they did their fair share of "pop" in Pokémon and Mario spin-offs, their main core games were kept special.
Now they've ditched that in their main games too.
It let me down.
> Nintendo have innovated us with new genres, new ideas, and made their
> games stand above competitors, however, the only console to make me
> feel like I'm playing 'classics' at the moment is the Xbox. And even
> then, the majority of good games are third party.
Yeah, the Xbox seems to becoming the best platform for epic titles.
It seems that the N64's heritage split two ways, the Gamecube picking up on the "cheap fun" multiplayer like Mario Kart, Soccer Slam and Smash Brothers while the Xbox continued the Mario 64, Zelda 64 and Goldeneye lineage of blowing people away. Microsoft even bought Rare! :-D
> Tis the ways games are going.
Yeah, but that's hardly a GOOD thing is it! :-P
> The thing is - Nintendo HAVE learnt from their mistakes and have
> released these excellent titles.
>
> HOWEVER...
>
> They're now making games that look and feel how the other popular
> games on other systems do.
Yeah. Watered down "Pop" titles.
The reason the hardcore N64 base liked them so much is because although they did their fair share of "pop" in Pokémon and Mario spin-offs, their main core games were kept special.
Now they've ditched that in their main games too.
It let me down.
> Nintendo have innovated us with new genres, new ideas, and made their
> games stand above competitors, however, the only console to make me
> feel like I'm playing 'classics' at the moment is the Xbox. And even
> then, the majority of good games are third party.
Yeah, the Xbox seems to becoming the best platform for epic titles.
It seems that the N64's heritage split two ways, the Gamecube picking up on the "cheap fun" multiplayer like Mario Kart, Soccer Slam and Smash Brothers while the Xbox continued the Mario 64, Zelda 64 and Goldeneye lineage of blowing people away. Microsoft even bought Rare! :-D
> Tis the ways games are going.
Yeah, but that's hardly a GOOD thing is it! :-P
Thing I liked about Metroid was that it was like Burnout 2.
Absoloutely sod-all EA style nonsense. Straight in, let the gameplay (and looks) shine more than too many fancy FMVs.
Absoloutely sod-all EA style nonsense. Straight in, let the gameplay (and looks) shine more than too many fancy FMVs.
I still think Eternal Darkness has the best presentation of any game on the market today, I don't know why more wasn't made out of it; not only is it probably one of the scariest titles ever, but it was just... brilliant. You only notice you're revisiting the same two (or three) places over and over about half way through the game. Which is great :-D
Metroid Prime has always been my favourite GameCube game; solving puzzles was just so satisfying and the storyline was done brilliantly because choose how much, or little, you want to know. Plus, there were no cut-scenes to split apart the action.
I could imagine it sucking if you used hints, though. I turned them off straight away.
Metroid Prime has always been my favourite GameCube game; solving puzzles was just so satisfying and the storyline was done brilliantly because choose how much, or little, you want to know. Plus, there were no cut-scenes to split apart the action.
I could imagine it sucking if you used hints, though. I turned them off straight away.
Rickoss wrote:
> But look at it like this; what do other consoles have? Nintendo have
> easily got the strongest line-up of games when compared to both XBox
> and PlayStation 2, evenif the other consoles outdo Nintendo in terms
> of numbers. Zelda, Prime, Eternal Darkness, Mario Kart; they're all
> better than any XBox or PS2 title.
Zelda is the best games series ever - so I can't contest that.
Metroid Prime didn't really do anything for me - good enough to keep, but I haven't gone back to it since I played it last a few months ago.
Eternal Darkness was excellent! Though I prefered Resident Evil on the Cube.
Mario Kart is the best kart racer on the market - easily.
But on my Xbox, I have these games which I enjoy just as much as any Nintendo title:
Rainbow Six 3
Halo
Midtown Madness 3 (online only)
Jet Set Radio Future
Return to Castle Wolfenstein
and various others.
Playstation 2 doesn't have ANYTHING exclusive to it that makes it worth me getting for myself, and therefore isn't worth me making a comparison.
> But look at it like this; what do other consoles have? Nintendo have
> easily got the strongest line-up of games when compared to both XBox
> and PlayStation 2, evenif the other consoles outdo Nintendo in terms
> of numbers. Zelda, Prime, Eternal Darkness, Mario Kart; they're all
> better than any XBox or PS2 title.
Zelda is the best games series ever - so I can't contest that.
Metroid Prime didn't really do anything for me - good enough to keep, but I haven't gone back to it since I played it last a few months ago.
Eternal Darkness was excellent! Though I prefered Resident Evil on the Cube.
Mario Kart is the best kart racer on the market - easily.
But on my Xbox, I have these games which I enjoy just as much as any Nintendo title:
Rainbow Six 3
Halo
Midtown Madness 3 (online only)
Jet Set Radio Future
Return to Castle Wolfenstein
and various others.
Playstation 2 doesn't have ANYTHING exclusive to it that makes it worth me getting for myself, and therefore isn't worth me making a comparison.
Eternal Darkness is legendary and never talked about.
*sniff*
*sniff*
Page: