The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
The games industry today is full of hype. Products get just as much publicity as anything else, and sometimes even more spin than a Labour Party press conference, so why do a lot of people seem to be dissilusioned and uninterested by the current crop of games and consoles? Everyone seems to be pining for the next big thing, even though there are many good, solid games currently available, but despite this no one seems to care. This could be an indication the gaming has lost it's essence of entertainment, and has become something of a competition. Competition is good for business and quality in general, but the cometition in question here is between gamers themselves.
What should it matter to someone if a system they do not want is outperforming the system they do want? Or if someone else has an opinion that they do not agree with? Does that instantly make their loyalties to a company or their want for the style of games they like wrong? I don't think so myself. Genres of games are very unique, and very seldomly cross, a few original titles have been brought out to mix genres across the years, but never quite get as in depth to that genre as a dedicated game does. These games usually still do well however, because they appeal to a broad range of people, who for at least a little while can agree that a single game, on a single system is a good game. But if people didn;t have varying opinions, then we would have a much narower variety of games.
But we still however manage to fight about the future, and in a Future of Gaming forum, that is at least sticking to the point, but in other forums, I see little in the way of people celebrating what they have now. This may be because the best is yet to come from the PS2, or the Gamecube and Xbox are just around the corner, but surely the people waiting for these systems have games they are playing now. Yet there is still little discussion on the merits of today's gaming.
The reason I am highlighting this is simply because we are the future of gaming. We will all play some sort of role in the shape and direction of the games industry in the near and distant future. Some of us like myself will strive to have an impact on the games industry through developing, but for those amongst us who would prefer to simply play the games, what you buy will determine what people make and strive to perfect.
Look through the years at the most successful games, and genre defining titles. The basic principles set out in the beginning of a genre can usually still be found in a modern game, how many FPs games don't have a health system based on Wolfenstein 3D? And as far as RTS games go, the basic set-up is usually similar throughout. So what is it going to take for people to come up with new ideas? It is going to take people to look at what they have now, decide what they don't like about what they have now, and set about trying to get it changed.
We can still bicker, argue and disagree about what comes next or what will happen to Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft, but we should take stock of what we have every now and again, and harass people to give us what we want, even though most of us don't really know what that is.
What should it matter to someone if a system they do not want is outperforming the system they do want? Or if someone else has an opinion that they do not agree with? Does that instantly make their loyalties to a company or their want for the style of games they like wrong? I don't think so myself. Genres of games are very unique, and very seldomly cross, a few original titles have been brought out to mix genres across the years, but never quite get as in depth to that genre as a dedicated game does. These games usually still do well however, because they appeal to a broad range of people, who for at least a little while can agree that a single game, on a single system is a good game. But if people didn;t have varying opinions, then we would have a much narower variety of games.
But we still however manage to fight about the future, and in a Future of Gaming forum, that is at least sticking to the point, but in other forums, I see little in the way of people celebrating what they have now. This may be because the best is yet to come from the PS2, or the Gamecube and Xbox are just around the corner, but surely the people waiting for these systems have games they are playing now. Yet there is still little discussion on the merits of today's gaming.
The reason I am highlighting this is simply because we are the future of gaming. We will all play some sort of role in the shape and direction of the games industry in the near and distant future. Some of us like myself will strive to have an impact on the games industry through developing, but for those amongst us who would prefer to simply play the games, what you buy will determine what people make and strive to perfect.
Look through the years at the most successful games, and genre defining titles. The basic principles set out in the beginning of a genre can usually still be found in a modern game, how many FPs games don't have a health system based on Wolfenstein 3D? And as far as RTS games go, the basic set-up is usually similar throughout. So what is it going to take for people to come up with new ideas? It is going to take people to look at what they have now, decide what they don't like about what they have now, and set about trying to get it changed.
We can still bicker, argue and disagree about what comes next or what will happen to Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft, but we should take stock of what we have every now and again, and harass people to give us what we want, even though most of us don't really know what that is.
I'd say that the PS2 forum is full of "here and now" games.
The Nintendo forum has a fair bit of GBA (although we're mostly anticipating the Gamecube)
Wait until Spring next year.
Nintys will start talking about the Gaming present instead of the future.
This will mean less talking about future Gamecube titles when comparing to the PS2.
That way, PS2 owners won't have to argue back with their own future titles.
Having said that, when the Gamecube arrives, I expect a BIG drop in discussions and an even BIGGER increase in SR's profits?
I wonder why... :-)
The Nintendo forum has a fair bit of GBA (although we're mostly anticipating the Gamecube)
Wait until Spring next year.
Nintys will start talking about the Gaming present instead of the future.
This will mean less talking about future Gamecube titles when comparing to the PS2.
That way, PS2 owners won't have to argue back with their own future titles.
Having said that, when the Gamecube arrives, I expect a BIG drop in discussions and an even BIGGER increase in SR's profits?
I wonder why... :-)
Yeah, after I explained to game why copper processors are better than aluminium ones, that really baffled me. :D
I'm just teaching bonus about PAL Vs NTSC... I tried to explain that PAL is 17% slower, but he's having trouble with the math.
Time_Warp wrote:
> The Game wrote:
> Blah, Blah, Blah... nice topic sailor boy, But the games
> people know what we
> want...
Sailor? What are you suggesting jez? (:)
I'll take a guess you didn;t read his tagline, anyway, I called him it on MSN earlier today, and he was mortified, and in true Nintendo style, unoriginally copied it for his own use. :D
> The Game wrote:
> Blah, Blah, Blah... nice topic sailor boy, But the games
> people know what we
> want...
Sailor? What are you suggesting jez? (:)
I'll take a guess you didn;t read his tagline, anyway, I called him it on MSN earlier today, and he was mortified, and in true Nintendo style, unoriginally copied it for his own use. :D
I don't want you getting a crush on me Game, that just wont do.
:D
:D
Blah, Blah, Blah... nice topic sailor boy, But the games people know what we want...
From the success of MGS, do you think Kojima needed to be slapped in the face until he went pink to realise a sequel should be in the works? I don't think so... the dodgy git just wants to pawn of a successful franchise... and rightfully so!
MGS2 my cauliflower.
I'll tell you what's missing, gardening games... how i'd love to play the role of Alan Tichmarsh and plant Roses... that'd be cool... you could design ponds, buy fish and even sign autographs!
Anyway, back to my topic...
Yeah....
Well...
Game
From the success of MGS, do you think Kojima needed to be slapped in the face until he went pink to realise a sequel should be in the works? I don't think so... the dodgy git just wants to pawn of a successful franchise... and rightfully so!
MGS2 my cauliflower.
I'll tell you what's missing, gardening games... how i'd love to play the role of Alan Tichmarsh and plant Roses... that'd be cool... you could design ponds, buy fish and even sign autographs!
Anyway, back to my topic...
Yeah....
Well...
Game
The games industry today is full of hype. Products get just as much publicity as anything else, and sometimes even more spin than a Labour Party press conference, so why do a lot of people seem to be dissilusioned and uninterested by the current crop of games and consoles? Everyone seems to be pining for the next big thing, even though there are many good, solid games currently available, but despite this no one seems to care. This could be an indication the gaming has lost it's essence of entertainment, and has become something of a competition. Competition is good for business and quality in general, but the cometition in question here is between gamers themselves.
What should it matter to someone if a system they do not want is outperforming the system they do want? Or if someone else has an opinion that they do not agree with? Does that instantly make their loyalties to a company or their want for the style of games they like wrong? I don't think so myself. Genres of games are very unique, and very seldomly cross, a few original titles have been brought out to mix genres across the years, but never quite get as in depth to that genre as a dedicated game does. These games usually still do well however, because they appeal to a broad range of people, who for at least a little while can agree that a single game, on a single system is a good game. But if people didn;t have varying opinions, then we would have a much narower variety of games.
But we still however manage to fight about the future, and in a Future of Gaming forum, that is at least sticking to the point, but in other forums, I see little in the way of people celebrating what they have now. This may be because the best is yet to come from the PS2, or the Gamecube and Xbox are just around the corner, but surely the people waiting for these systems have games they are playing now. Yet there is still little discussion on the merits of today's gaming.
The reason I am highlighting this is simply because we are the future of gaming. We will all play some sort of role in the shape and direction of the games industry in the near and distant future. Some of us like myself will strive to have an impact on the games industry through developing, but for those amongst us who would prefer to simply play the games, what you buy will determine what people make and strive to perfect.
Look through the years at the most successful games, and genre defining titles. The basic principles set out in the beginning of a genre can usually still be found in a modern game, how many FPs games don't have a health system based on Wolfenstein 3D? And as far as RTS games go, the basic set-up is usually similar throughout. So what is it going to take for people to come up with new ideas? It is going to take people to look at what they have now, decide what they don't like about what they have now, and set about trying to get it changed.
We can still bicker, argue and disagree about what comes next or what will happen to Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft, but we should take stock of what we have every now and again, and harass people to give us what we want, even though most of us don't really know what that is.
What should it matter to someone if a system they do not want is outperforming the system they do want? Or if someone else has an opinion that they do not agree with? Does that instantly make their loyalties to a company or their want for the style of games they like wrong? I don't think so myself. Genres of games are very unique, and very seldomly cross, a few original titles have been brought out to mix genres across the years, but never quite get as in depth to that genre as a dedicated game does. These games usually still do well however, because they appeal to a broad range of people, who for at least a little while can agree that a single game, on a single system is a good game. But if people didn;t have varying opinions, then we would have a much narower variety of games.
But we still however manage to fight about the future, and in a Future of Gaming forum, that is at least sticking to the point, but in other forums, I see little in the way of people celebrating what they have now. This may be because the best is yet to come from the PS2, or the Gamecube and Xbox are just around the corner, but surely the people waiting for these systems have games they are playing now. Yet there is still little discussion on the merits of today's gaming.
The reason I am highlighting this is simply because we are the future of gaming. We will all play some sort of role in the shape and direction of the games industry in the near and distant future. Some of us like myself will strive to have an impact on the games industry through developing, but for those amongst us who would prefer to simply play the games, what you buy will determine what people make and strive to perfect.
Look through the years at the most successful games, and genre defining titles. The basic principles set out in the beginning of a genre can usually still be found in a modern game, how many FPs games don't have a health system based on Wolfenstein 3D? And as far as RTS games go, the basic set-up is usually similar throughout. So what is it going to take for people to come up with new ideas? It is going to take people to look at what they have now, decide what they don't like about what they have now, and set about trying to get it changed.
We can still bicker, argue and disagree about what comes next or what will happen to Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft, but we should take stock of what we have every now and again, and harass people to give us what we want, even though most of us don't really know what that is.