The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
This post may seem as though it's having a go at Sony and the PS2, but it's not. Sony are in business to make money, to be succesful, and they have achieved that, so all credit to them. This post is about my annoyance with people who complain about the lack of originality in the games market today, yet then confess to owning a PS2. Excuse me?! How can you say that?
If you like the sort of games available for the PS2, fine, no problem, but why do some people who do that then complain about the lack or originality? I'm not getting at specific people here, just the populace in general. And I'm not just throwing wild accusations around because of my dislike for Sony and the PS2. I grudgingly respect the both of them. What I'm complaining about lies in fact, and can bu summed up by this simple statement:
The PS2 has the largest number of least original titles EVER.
Simple. I don't mean sequels either, all platforms have sequels. I'm talking about genre defining games. All platforms have those as well, except the PS2. The PC probably has most, simply due to the nature of the system. Let's have a look at a few "acknowledged classics" of recent times, shall we?
Black and White (PC), Deus Ex (PC), Jet Set Radio (DC), Goldeneye (N64), Zelda (N64), Tony Hawks (PSX), Half Life (PC), M:SR (DC), this list goes on and on. Yet none of these titles appeared initially on the PS2. Why not? I know that the PS2 is still young as a console, but there are games scheduled for both the XBox and 'Cube that will push genres to their limits, maybe even begin new genres. Please, don't throw the old "What about GT3?" at me either. The game that Sony is using to sell their next-gen console is a re-hash of a 3 year old game, but with better graphics. 'Nuff said.
Is Sony's position a reflection the the state of the industry at the moment? At a time when more people are involved in emulation than with online games (emulation fans number in their millions, as opposed to the mere tens of thousands who play online), it seems that we are aching to get back to the roots of gaming, rather than embrace new things. Maybe Sony have it right?
Maybe it is because the money men have taken over the industry. No longer can someone program a game in their bedroom, take it to the local computer shop for people to try out, and it get turned into a multiplatform, multi-title, million dollar franchise, which is what happened with Worms. That just won't happen any more. Games companies are run by business men, not programmers.
The sole purpose of a games company is to make money, and if they have a product that will sell to the masses, how-ever boring or rubbish it is, they will make it. Who Wants To Be A Millionaire anyone? Countless TombRaider clones? Countless The Sims add-ons. But can you really blame them for not wanting to try anything different? Look at MS Train Sim, how many jokes, how much ridicule was there about that game, just because it was trying to be different?
Luckily, some developers do have the money, the inspiration and the name to pull something new out of the bag. Games like Max Payne, B&W, Jet Set Radio etc, the ones I mentioned earlier. All either new genres, or pushing an exisitng genre to it's limits. It seems though, that you need to be an established name in the industry, before you get to go your own way. Peter Molyneux (B&W) and Warren Spector (Deus Ex) both started out in the gaming industry, when you could just get a couple of people together and make a classic. It is harder now for new people/companies to do that.
I just hope that with (hopefully) all the new gamers that are brought into our fantastic gaming world by the new consoles, the developers will pay attention, and gives us the original titles we need. Also, next time you complain about the lack of originality, just check to make sure you're not actually contributing to the amount of dross we have to put up with at the moment.
If you like the sort of games available for the PS2, fine, no problem, but why do some people who do that then complain about the lack or originality? I'm not getting at specific people here, just the populace in general. And I'm not just throwing wild accusations around because of my dislike for Sony and the PS2. I grudgingly respect the both of them. What I'm complaining about lies in fact, and can bu summed up by this simple statement:
The PS2 has the largest number of least original titles EVER.
Simple. I don't mean sequels either, all platforms have sequels. I'm talking about genre defining games. All platforms have those as well, except the PS2. The PC probably has most, simply due to the nature of the system. Let's have a look at a few "acknowledged classics" of recent times, shall we?
Black and White (PC), Deus Ex (PC), Jet Set Radio (DC), Goldeneye (N64), Zelda (N64), Tony Hawks (PSX), Half Life (PC), M:SR (DC), this list goes on and on. Yet none of these titles appeared initially on the PS2. Why not? I know that the PS2 is still young as a console, but there are games scheduled for both the XBox and 'Cube that will push genres to their limits, maybe even begin new genres. Please, don't throw the old "What about GT3?" at me either. The game that Sony is using to sell their next-gen console is a re-hash of a 3 year old game, but with better graphics. 'Nuff said.
Is Sony's position a reflection the the state of the industry at the moment? At a time when more people are involved in emulation than with online games (emulation fans number in their millions, as opposed to the mere tens of thousands who play online), it seems that we are aching to get back to the roots of gaming, rather than embrace new things. Maybe Sony have it right?
Maybe it is because the money men have taken over the industry. No longer can someone program a game in their bedroom, take it to the local computer shop for people to try out, and it get turned into a multiplatform, multi-title, million dollar franchise, which is what happened with Worms. That just won't happen any more. Games companies are run by business men, not programmers.
The sole purpose of a games company is to make money, and if they have a product that will sell to the masses, how-ever boring or rubbish it is, they will make it. Who Wants To Be A Millionaire anyone? Countless TombRaider clones? Countless The Sims add-ons. But can you really blame them for not wanting to try anything different? Look at MS Train Sim, how many jokes, how much ridicule was there about that game, just because it was trying to be different?
Luckily, some developers do have the money, the inspiration and the name to pull something new out of the bag. Games like Max Payne, B&W, Jet Set Radio etc, the ones I mentioned earlier. All either new genres, or pushing an exisitng genre to it's limits. It seems though, that you need to be an established name in the industry, before you get to go your own way. Peter Molyneux (B&W) and Warren Spector (Deus Ex) both started out in the gaming industry, when you could just get a couple of people together and make a classic. It is harder now for new people/companies to do that.
I just hope that with (hopefully) all the new gamers that are brought into our fantastic gaming world by the new consoles, the developers will pay attention, and gives us the original titles we need. Also, next time you complain about the lack of originality, just check to make sure you're not actually contributing to the amount of dross we have to put up with at the moment.
Page:
When I look on the shelves of game shops, I look for something different.....
Those games that we see and say "I wish Id thought of that" are the games that bring ideas into reality.
The sims for example.... a game where you control little people in a house. This original because no other game has done the same, but everyone has probably thought about how cool it would be to control virtual sims, but just never thought it would happen.
I might be going away from the subject here.... but mobile phones.... a phone that you take around with you... "I wish Id thought of that".... It makes you wonder why the idea hadnt been thought up years and years ago.....
So my view is that anything that is original will sell, but not everyone is looking for originality, they want to buy a game and know that theyre going to like it.... If you like Tombraider 1, then your going to like Tombraider 9!
----
YH wrote:
No longer can someone program a game in their bedroom, take it to the local computer shop for people to try out, and it get turned into a multiplatform, multi-title, million dollar franchise, which is what happened with Worms.
Does anyone actually know where you can go if you have an idea for a game?
I mean ive had loads of great ideas in the past and have always wanted to make them reality!
Maybe Im dreaming?... but has anyone got any info?
Those games that we see and say "I wish Id thought of that" are the games that bring ideas into reality.
The sims for example.... a game where you control little people in a house. This original because no other game has done the same, but everyone has probably thought about how cool it would be to control virtual sims, but just never thought it would happen.
I might be going away from the subject here.... but mobile phones.... a phone that you take around with you... "I wish Id thought of that".... It makes you wonder why the idea hadnt been thought up years and years ago.....
So my view is that anything that is original will sell, but not everyone is looking for originality, they want to buy a game and know that theyre going to like it.... If you like Tombraider 1, then your going to like Tombraider 9!
----
YH wrote:
No longer can someone program a game in their bedroom, take it to the local computer shop for people to try out, and it get turned into a multiplatform, multi-title, million dollar franchise, which is what happened with Worms.
Does anyone actually know where you can go if you have an idea for a game?
I mean ive had loads of great ideas in the past and have always wanted to make them reality!
Maybe Im dreaming?... but has anyone got any info?
Your Honour wrote:
> No I don't have a PS2. I was tmepted to get one, but after looking
> into it quite deeply, I decide an XBox or 'Cube would be a better
> buy.
If I had the money, I would consider getting a PS2, but not
> for £270. If they came down to £200, then possbily...
You've made the right decision here, Your Honour. I went out and purchased a PS2 when it was at £299, and I used up all of my money. I've no money to spend on games, which means that SSX, Ready 2 Rumble and Wild Wild Racing are the only PS2 titles I have- and believe me, they get very boring...very boring....zzzzzz....
Yeah, the Gamecube will be a better choice, and I slightly regret getting my PS2 now. I desperately need a Gamecube and am hoping to get one the day it comes out. I only hope to god that I can afford enough games to make me happy.
I will not be getting an X-box, as I feel it will be a waste of money to be quite honest with you. And one other thing, Your Honour, Australia will be an interesting place to shop - because they use PAL and they usually have things earlier AND cheaper than us. You don't pay extra for posting and packaging AND they deliver the goods within a week!
'Cor blimey, mate! That sounds like a real corker :-).
How about that then, Your Honour?
> No I don't have a PS2. I was tmepted to get one, but after looking
> into it quite deeply, I decide an XBox or 'Cube would be a better
> buy.
If I had the money, I would consider getting a PS2, but not
> for £270. If they came down to £200, then possbily...
You've made the right decision here, Your Honour. I went out and purchased a PS2 when it was at £299, and I used up all of my money. I've no money to spend on games, which means that SSX, Ready 2 Rumble and Wild Wild Racing are the only PS2 titles I have- and believe me, they get very boring...very boring....zzzzzz....
Yeah, the Gamecube will be a better choice, and I slightly regret getting my PS2 now. I desperately need a Gamecube and am hoping to get one the day it comes out. I only hope to god that I can afford enough games to make me happy.
I will not be getting an X-box, as I feel it will be a waste of money to be quite honest with you. And one other thing, Your Honour, Australia will be an interesting place to shop - because they use PAL and they usually have things earlier AND cheaper than us. You don't pay extra for posting and packaging AND they deliver the goods within a week!
'Cor blimey, mate! That sounds like a real corker :-).
How about that then, Your Honour?
I think that Originality is the way forward.
When ever I've had with normal people conversations about the DC or PS2 (most of these people have the original Playstation) they normally say,
"Buy a new console for better graphics?"
So far, the PS2 has sold more than hype than content.
The PSOne made it's success by content.
And the PSOnes success was based on originality.
Tombraider, Tekken, Resident Evil (I know it comepletely rips off alone in the dark but I doubt most people have played that old PC game and RE did it much better too), Final Fantasy 7, etc.
All these games had 16bit roots but this was the first time they'd been produced with such quality.
Once these franchises became successful, their creators milked them for all they were worth (sequels) other devellopers simply copied the game's formula in order to get a secured hit (clones).
The PS2 is mainly clones and Sequels.
It has select few original games but most of these are likely to appear on other systems.
Many of the casual gamers who bought the PSOne won't want to spend 300 pounds for games they already have. only with polished graphics.
The Gamecube has a new appeal. It shows to be a great four player machine.
It'll offer the full range of 4 player split screen games from fun ones like Monkey Ball and DK Racing to more serious ones like Perfect Dark.
I'm not sure what the Xbox offers new but I'm sure that YH and FM will be able to fill this space.
People might be scared of something new at first, but they're even less likely to pay a fortune for something they that just offers what they played yesterday with polished graphics.
When ever I've had with normal people conversations about the DC or PS2 (most of these people have the original Playstation) they normally say,
"Buy a new console for better graphics?"
So far, the PS2 has sold more than hype than content.
The PSOne made it's success by content.
And the PSOnes success was based on originality.
Tombraider, Tekken, Resident Evil (I know it comepletely rips off alone in the dark but I doubt most people have played that old PC game and RE did it much better too), Final Fantasy 7, etc.
All these games had 16bit roots but this was the first time they'd been produced with such quality.
Once these franchises became successful, their creators milked them for all they were worth (sequels) other devellopers simply copied the game's formula in order to get a secured hit (clones).
The PS2 is mainly clones and Sequels.
It has select few original games but most of these are likely to appear on other systems.
Many of the casual gamers who bought the PSOne won't want to spend 300 pounds for games they already have. only with polished graphics.
The Gamecube has a new appeal. It shows to be a great four player machine.
It'll offer the full range of 4 player split screen games from fun ones like Monkey Ball and DK Racing to more serious ones like Perfect Dark.
I'm not sure what the Xbox offers new but I'm sure that YH and FM will be able to fill this space.
People might be scared of something new at first, but they're even less likely to pay a fortune for something they that just offers what they played yesterday with polished graphics.
No I don't have a PS2. I was tmepted to get one, but after looking into it quite deeply, I decide an XBox or 'Cube would be a better buy.
If I had the money, I would consider getting a PS2, but not for £270. If they came down to £200, then possbily...
If I had the money, I would consider getting a PS2, but not for £270. If they came down to £200, then possbily...
I've just read Ant's story, so I couldn't be bothered to read all of this:D
However, I did scan it a bit, and I must say that the PS2 surely did NOT have the least original games ever, did it?
I'm bored with my PS2 I must admit, but that's because I have no money :(
Do you have a PS2? (off the record :-))
However, I did scan it a bit, and I must say that the PS2 surely did NOT have the least original games ever, did it?
I'm bored with my PS2 I must admit, but that's because I have no money :(
Do you have a PS2? (off the record :-))
This post may seem as though it's having a go at Sony and the PS2, but it's not. Sony are in business to make money, to be succesful, and they have achieved that, so all credit to them. This post is about my annoyance with people who complain about the lack of originality in the games market today, yet then confess to owning a PS2. Excuse me?! How can you say that?
If you like the sort of games available for the PS2, fine, no problem, but why do some people who do that then complain about the lack or originality? I'm not getting at specific people here, just the populace in general. And I'm not just throwing wild accusations around because of my dislike for Sony and the PS2. I grudgingly respect the both of them. What I'm complaining about lies in fact, and can bu summed up by this simple statement:
The PS2 has the largest number of least original titles EVER.
Simple. I don't mean sequels either, all platforms have sequels. I'm talking about genre defining games. All platforms have those as well, except the PS2. The PC probably has most, simply due to the nature of the system. Let's have a look at a few "acknowledged classics" of recent times, shall we?
Black and White (PC), Deus Ex (PC), Jet Set Radio (DC), Goldeneye (N64), Zelda (N64), Tony Hawks (PSX), Half Life (PC), M:SR (DC), this list goes on and on. Yet none of these titles appeared initially on the PS2. Why not? I know that the PS2 is still young as a console, but there are games scheduled for both the XBox and 'Cube that will push genres to their limits, maybe even begin new genres. Please, don't throw the old "What about GT3?" at me either. The game that Sony is using to sell their next-gen console is a re-hash of a 3 year old game, but with better graphics. 'Nuff said.
Is Sony's position a reflection the the state of the industry at the moment? At a time when more people are involved in emulation than with online games (emulation fans number in their millions, as opposed to the mere tens of thousands who play online), it seems that we are aching to get back to the roots of gaming, rather than embrace new things. Maybe Sony have it right?
Maybe it is because the money men have taken over the industry. No longer can someone program a game in their bedroom, take it to the local computer shop for people to try out, and it get turned into a multiplatform, multi-title, million dollar franchise, which is what happened with Worms. That just won't happen any more. Games companies are run by business men, not programmers.
The sole purpose of a games company is to make money, and if they have a product that will sell to the masses, how-ever boring or rubbish it is, they will make it. Who Wants To Be A Millionaire anyone? Countless TombRaider clones? Countless The Sims add-ons. But can you really blame them for not wanting to try anything different? Look at MS Train Sim, how many jokes, how much ridicule was there about that game, just because it was trying to be different?
Luckily, some developers do have the money, the inspiration and the name to pull something new out of the bag. Games like Max Payne, B&W, Jet Set Radio etc, the ones I mentioned earlier. All either new genres, or pushing an exisitng genre to it's limits. It seems though, that you need to be an established name in the industry, before you get to go your own way. Peter Molyneux (B&W) and Warren Spector (Deus Ex) both started out in the gaming industry, when you could just get a couple of people together and make a classic. It is harder now for new people/companies to do that.
I just hope that with (hopefully) all the new gamers that are brought into our fantastic gaming world by the new consoles, the developers will pay attention, and gives us the original titles we need. Also, next time you complain about the lack of originality, just check to make sure you're not actually contributing to the amount of dross we have to put up with at the moment.
If you like the sort of games available for the PS2, fine, no problem, but why do some people who do that then complain about the lack or originality? I'm not getting at specific people here, just the populace in general. And I'm not just throwing wild accusations around because of my dislike for Sony and the PS2. I grudgingly respect the both of them. What I'm complaining about lies in fact, and can bu summed up by this simple statement:
The PS2 has the largest number of least original titles EVER.
Simple. I don't mean sequels either, all platforms have sequels. I'm talking about genre defining games. All platforms have those as well, except the PS2. The PC probably has most, simply due to the nature of the system. Let's have a look at a few "acknowledged classics" of recent times, shall we?
Black and White (PC), Deus Ex (PC), Jet Set Radio (DC), Goldeneye (N64), Zelda (N64), Tony Hawks (PSX), Half Life (PC), M:SR (DC), this list goes on and on. Yet none of these titles appeared initially on the PS2. Why not? I know that the PS2 is still young as a console, but there are games scheduled for both the XBox and 'Cube that will push genres to their limits, maybe even begin new genres. Please, don't throw the old "What about GT3?" at me either. The game that Sony is using to sell their next-gen console is a re-hash of a 3 year old game, but with better graphics. 'Nuff said.
Is Sony's position a reflection the the state of the industry at the moment? At a time when more people are involved in emulation than with online games (emulation fans number in their millions, as opposed to the mere tens of thousands who play online), it seems that we are aching to get back to the roots of gaming, rather than embrace new things. Maybe Sony have it right?
Maybe it is because the money men have taken over the industry. No longer can someone program a game in their bedroom, take it to the local computer shop for people to try out, and it get turned into a multiplatform, multi-title, million dollar franchise, which is what happened with Worms. That just won't happen any more. Games companies are run by business men, not programmers.
The sole purpose of a games company is to make money, and if they have a product that will sell to the masses, how-ever boring or rubbish it is, they will make it. Who Wants To Be A Millionaire anyone? Countless TombRaider clones? Countless The Sims add-ons. But can you really blame them for not wanting to try anything different? Look at MS Train Sim, how many jokes, how much ridicule was there about that game, just because it was trying to be different?
Luckily, some developers do have the money, the inspiration and the name to pull something new out of the bag. Games like Max Payne, B&W, Jet Set Radio etc, the ones I mentioned earlier. All either new genres, or pushing an exisitng genre to it's limits. It seems though, that you need to be an established name in the industry, before you get to go your own way. Peter Molyneux (B&W) and Warren Spector (Deus Ex) both started out in the gaming industry, when you could just get a couple of people together and make a classic. It is harder now for new people/companies to do that.
I just hope that with (hopefully) all the new gamers that are brought into our fantastic gaming world by the new consoles, the developers will pay attention, and gives us the original titles we need. Also, next time you complain about the lack of originality, just check to make sure you're not actually contributing to the amount of dross we have to put up with at the moment.
Page: