The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
While Nintendo is releasing a small number of well presented, high quality epic games, Sega continues to release a huge amount of zany, original titles.
So what is it that drives the companies to produce so different a game? Actually, the answer is simple.
The game designers and producers at Nintendo (eg. Shigsy) are all artists. They like to make games that are.. well... arty! There's no other way to put it. They don't care what hardware they are making the game for... they design the story and character of the game, and then give it to the programmers who make it into reality.
Things are different at the Sega camp. Here all the game producers (almost without exception) are porogrammers. They design a game around the hardware. Let me give some examples. Naka-san, creator of Sonic, was given a Meg Drive dev kit, and wanted to make something to compete with Mario. They spent 6 months just getting the graphics to go fast... and then he designed the game! Yu Suzuki (or was it the head of Amusment Vision?)was given the model 2 arcade board, and wanted to do something never seen before... make a 3D racer! So his team spent weeks working with code in order to make a polygon appear on screen.
And that is the difference between the companies. Nintendo do the best they can onn the hardware, but put all their effort into the soul of the game. Sega wow crowds by pushing hardware beyond anyone else (could any other company have bothered to make Shenmue?), with the gameplay based firmly into the new technology.
To finish off... let's make this relevant to the FOG... hmmmm...
Do you think this rift between the companies will continue in the future, or will they converge as some departments in Sega work closer and closer to those at Nintendo?
So what is it that drives the companies to produce so different a game? Actually, the answer is simple.
The game designers and producers at Nintendo (eg. Shigsy) are all artists. They like to make games that are.. well... arty! There's no other way to put it. They don't care what hardware they are making the game for... they design the story and character of the game, and then give it to the programmers who make it into reality.
Things are different at the Sega camp. Here all the game producers (almost without exception) are porogrammers. They design a game around the hardware. Let me give some examples. Naka-san, creator of Sonic, was given a Meg Drive dev kit, and wanted to make something to compete with Mario. They spent 6 months just getting the graphics to go fast... and then he designed the game! Yu Suzuki (or was it the head of Amusment Vision?)was given the model 2 arcade board, and wanted to do something never seen before... make a 3D racer! So his team spent weeks working with code in order to make a polygon appear on screen.
And that is the difference between the companies. Nintendo do the best they can onn the hardware, but put all their effort into the soul of the game. Sega wow crowds by pushing hardware beyond anyone else (could any other company have bothered to make Shenmue?), with the gameplay based firmly into the new technology.
To finish off... let's make this relevant to the FOG... hmmmm...
Do you think this rift between the companies will continue in the future, or will they converge as some departments in Sega work closer and closer to those at Nintendo?
Page:
Xbox has only Suzuki I'm afraid.
Still, he's good at the realistic stuff, but not so hot at fantasy.
Gamecube owners get the full whammy!
Wehey!
Still, he's good at the realistic stuff, but not so hot at fantasy.
Gamecube owners get the full whammy!
Wehey!
Strafex wrote:
> Anyway, Miyamoto, Naka, Suzuki - the three gaming geniouses.
It
> doesn't matter which one is your favourite, they're all behind the
> Gamecube (Miyamoto and Naka exclusively too!)
Here's to gaming!
Heres to the X-Box!!
*everyone looks around and says its early birthday beets for you!!
> Anyway, Miyamoto, Naka, Suzuki - the three gaming geniouses.
It
> doesn't matter which one is your favourite, they're all behind the
> Gamecube (Miyamoto and Naka exclusively too!)
Here's to gaming!
Heres to the X-Box!!
*everyone looks around and says its early birthday beets for you!!
Anyway, Miyamoto, Naka, Suzuki - the three gaming geniouses.
It doesn't matter which one is your favourite, they're all behind the Gamecube (Miyamoto and Naka exclusively too!)
Here's to gaming!
It doesn't matter which one is your favourite, they're all behind the Gamecube (Miyamoto and Naka exclusively too!)
Here's to gaming!
Mario lacked originality in getting coins and stars?
Well coins have always been in but the Stars...
This was the first game where instead of simply completing a level (get from A-B) you have to search it and complete various challenges in order to get a star from that level.
A game hadn't been done like that before.
The first game to instead of going through a world, you simply searched for levels in the castle of Princess Peach.
Mario isn't the only example. Take Goldeneye (yes, it's made by Rare, but Nintendo work with them so closely, they're as close to Nintendo as Sonic team are to Sega!)
Goldeneye introduced loads of new ideas to the FPS concept.
Not simply completing a mission (from A-B), you had to take detours in order to complete your mission objectives, sniping and stealth was introduced, as was four player splitscreen deathmatching and lots more too.
There's been Blast Corps, Mario Party, Zelda Majora's Mask (the idea of a set three days to do things in was genious).
Sega are no more original/innoative than Nintendo. Yes, Sega have a little more diversity with both Arcade style games and deeper games too I'll give you that.
They're both original and innoative in different ways.
I'd call them equals.
Well coins have always been in but the Stars...
This was the first game where instead of simply completing a level (get from A-B) you have to search it and complete various challenges in order to get a star from that level.
A game hadn't been done like that before.
The first game to instead of going through a world, you simply searched for levels in the castle of Princess Peach.
Mario isn't the only example. Take Goldeneye (yes, it's made by Rare, but Nintendo work with them so closely, they're as close to Nintendo as Sonic team are to Sega!)
Goldeneye introduced loads of new ideas to the FPS concept.
Not simply completing a mission (from A-B), you had to take detours in order to complete your mission objectives, sniping and stealth was introduced, as was four player splitscreen deathmatching and lots more too.
There's been Blast Corps, Mario Party, Zelda Majora's Mask (the idea of a set three days to do things in was genious).
Sega are no more original/innoative than Nintendo. Yes, Sega have a little more diversity with both Arcade style games and deeper games too I'll give you that.
They're both original and innoative in different ways.
I'd call them equals.
Teh TWO things that makes me like Sega over Ninty are this:
1) Sega make a FAR greater range of games... it's simply gonna happen due to the size of Sega, and the fact that they are able to make games for any platform. Even in the age of the DC, Sega made games for Arcades, Phones and handhelds too!
2) Sega games are more original. Bear in mind, I mean ORIGINAL... not innovative. For example, Mario 64 was extremely inovative in gameplay and graphics, but lacked originality (ie, get coins, get stars). Sega, however, make so many more games a year than Ninty that they are free to experiment more. Games like Jet Set, NiGHTS! and Rez demonstrate this.
That is just MY opinion... and not a fact you can argue with!
1) Sega make a FAR greater range of games... it's simply gonna happen due to the size of Sega, and the fact that they are able to make games for any platform. Even in the age of the DC, Sega made games for Arcades, Phones and handhelds too!
2) Sega games are more original. Bear in mind, I mean ORIGINAL... not innovative. For example, Mario 64 was extremely inovative in gameplay and graphics, but lacked originality (ie, get coins, get stars). Sega, however, make so many more games a year than Ninty that they are free to experiment more. Games like Jet Set, NiGHTS! and Rez demonstrate this.
That is just MY opinion... and not a fact you can argue with!
Sega make some of the Very Best games out there!
Nintendo are the Kings though, the quality oozes from most titles.
In fact only for Nintendo producing games for the N64, it would have been a Dreamcast 4 years ago.
Nintendo are the Kings though, the quality oozes from most titles.
In fact only for Nintendo producing games for the N64, it would have been a Dreamcast 4 years ago.
The Dogfather wrote:
> Ninentendo make better everything, Sega fail at everything.
> Espcially at making consoles. Sega just make loads of games, half
> of them ain't any good. But Nintendo made Perfect Dark and
> Goldeneye. Two of the best FPS ever.
Please, shoot yourself. Now.
Anyway, I personally have always favoured Sega over Nintendo. Nintendo games in general are quite slow (yes, there are excpetions as always so no one quote them) but in general they are slow. Sega games, however, are mostly very fast and furious. Take Sonic, Crazy Taxi, Daytona, Sega Rally and Virtua Fighter for example. This is what I like about Sega, and Sony for that matter. I like to get my adrenalin pumping when I play a game, and sadly, very few Nintendo games do it for me.
> Ninentendo make better everything, Sega fail at everything.
> Espcially at making consoles. Sega just make loads of games, half
> of them ain't any good. But Nintendo made Perfect Dark and
> Goldeneye. Two of the best FPS ever.
Please, shoot yourself. Now.
Anyway, I personally have always favoured Sega over Nintendo. Nintendo games in general are quite slow (yes, there are excpetions as always so no one quote them) but in general they are slow. Sega games, however, are mostly very fast and furious. Take Sonic, Crazy Taxi, Daytona, Sega Rally and Virtua Fighter for example. This is what I like about Sega, and Sony for that matter. I like to get my adrenalin pumping when I play a game, and sadly, very few Nintendo games do it for me.
The Dogfather wrote:
> Ninentendo make better everything, Sega fail at everything.
> Espcially at making consoles. Sega just make loads of games, half
> of them ain't any good. But Nintendo made Perfect Dark and
> Goldeneye. Two of the best FPS ever.
Ah... a bias ninty boy...
Little does he realise that Ninty made neither of these games... they published them. They also happen to have a share in the company who made the games- Rare. Just like Sony have a share in many developers who make great games, that they publish... so does that mean that sony are good game makers... seeing as they don't actually make games!
Anyway, as for the Miyamoto programming thing...
I'm sure Shigsy has pickedup some programming.. but I HIGHLY doubt that he writes one line of code in any of his games! Anyway... the point I was trying to make was that Shigsy looks at the design of the game through a artist viewpoint... while most Sega games designers look through a programmers point.
Of course, this is not 100% true.. otherwise Sega would make great tech demos, but poor games... and Shigsy would never have games with huge technical feats...
but u get my point.
> Ninentendo make better everything, Sega fail at everything.
> Espcially at making consoles. Sega just make loads of games, half
> of them ain't any good. But Nintendo made Perfect Dark and
> Goldeneye. Two of the best FPS ever.
Ah... a bias ninty boy...
Little does he realise that Ninty made neither of these games... they published them. They also happen to have a share in the company who made the games- Rare. Just like Sony have a share in many developers who make great games, that they publish... so does that mean that sony are good game makers... seeing as they don't actually make games!
Anyway, as for the Miyamoto programming thing...
I'm sure Shigsy has pickedup some programming.. but I HIGHLY doubt that he writes one line of code in any of his games! Anyway... the point I was trying to make was that Shigsy looks at the design of the game through a artist viewpoint... while most Sega games designers look through a programmers point.
Of course, this is not 100% true.. otherwise Sega would make great tech demos, but poor games... and Shigsy would never have games with huge technical feats...
but u get my point.
Page: