The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I read Digitiser today.
Its always a bad idea.
Don`t know why I bothered.
It talked about a vote held by CVG, that asked "people" what their favourite games were. They then compiled a "Top 100" list. Something like 7 of the top 10 were N64 titles. Including the top 2 I believe.
So, the deduction is that the N64 titles are the best... Nintendo rule, Sony are rubbish, only for casual gamers... etc....
Erm? There are many flaws to this. First of all:
No matter what people say, it has to be admitted that the range of choice on N64 is a little... limited. There may be good games, but they are released once every decade or two. This means that if you ask an N64 fan what their favourite game is, its quite likely to be one of those select few, which will add greatly to the votes received by those games.
You take an owner of a Sony console, and whilst it may *possibly* be argued that there aren`t as many gold platinum, medal winning, award achieving, ground breaking, mind numbingly excellent titles, there are loads and loads of good games. People are given such a huge choice that they won`t all agree on what`s best. Some will vote for this... some will vote for that... and others will vote for something else entirely different - not just platformers and a couple of FPSs. That cuts the vote count for all Sony games straight away.
The second point is equally important, though I`m sure there will be many of you who are exceptions:
The most likely people to have voted in this survey (though I don`t know for sure) are the readers of CVG. This as far as I know is a multi format magazine, so in theory it should have a fairly even spread of various console owners - wrong, and majorly so.
At present, the most recent console released is the PS2 (in the UK). As a result, if you walk into a Magazine store, you are confronted by mostly PS2/PS magazines, and a handful of PC mags. After careful hunting, you may find multi-format mags, and occasional DC/N64 mags. My point is that if you have a PS, then you`re very likely to buy PS mags, and no multi-format mags such as CVG. If you have an N64, it may be more sensible to buy multi-format, as you may be undecided what console to move onto. Do you switch to Sony, or march with Microsoft? It could make you go for mags such as CVG. Therefore - the mag readers are biased in the favour of Nintendo/Sega.
As a result - don`t believe those figures, or that survey. Whilst I know some of you may be exceptions to what I`ve said above, it is true for many other people.
Statistics are so hard to trust these days, unless you know everything there is to know about your sample.
Its always a bad idea.
Don`t know why I bothered.
It talked about a vote held by CVG, that asked "people" what their favourite games were. They then compiled a "Top 100" list. Something like 7 of the top 10 were N64 titles. Including the top 2 I believe.
So, the deduction is that the N64 titles are the best... Nintendo rule, Sony are rubbish, only for casual gamers... etc....
Erm? There are many flaws to this. First of all:
No matter what people say, it has to be admitted that the range of choice on N64 is a little... limited. There may be good games, but they are released once every decade or two. This means that if you ask an N64 fan what their favourite game is, its quite likely to be one of those select few, which will add greatly to the votes received by those games.
You take an owner of a Sony console, and whilst it may *possibly* be argued that there aren`t as many gold platinum, medal winning, award achieving, ground breaking, mind numbingly excellent titles, there are loads and loads of good games. People are given such a huge choice that they won`t all agree on what`s best. Some will vote for this... some will vote for that... and others will vote for something else entirely different - not just platformers and a couple of FPSs. That cuts the vote count for all Sony games straight away.
The second point is equally important, though I`m sure there will be many of you who are exceptions:
The most likely people to have voted in this survey (though I don`t know for sure) are the readers of CVG. This as far as I know is a multi format magazine, so in theory it should have a fairly even spread of various console owners - wrong, and majorly so.
At present, the most recent console released is the PS2 (in the UK). As a result, if you walk into a Magazine store, you are confronted by mostly PS2/PS magazines, and a handful of PC mags. After careful hunting, you may find multi-format mags, and occasional DC/N64 mags. My point is that if you have a PS, then you`re very likely to buy PS mags, and no multi-format mags such as CVG. If you have an N64, it may be more sensible to buy multi-format, as you may be undecided what console to move onto. Do you switch to Sony, or march with Microsoft? It could make you go for mags such as CVG. Therefore - the mag readers are biased in the favour of Nintendo/Sega.
As a result - don`t believe those figures, or that survey. Whilst I know some of you may be exceptions to what I`ve said above, it is true for many other people.
Statistics are so hard to trust these days, unless you know everything there is to know about your sample.
Page:
Tiltawhirl wrote:
that's those damn dirty conartists at
> Nintendo repackaging their old games.
What? if you don't wan't the game, they aren't about to make you buy it. As with so many old games, they're still enjoyed by loads of people, so why shouldn't it be possible for them to buy it on a seperate format? If the demand is there, people will buy it. SNES mario games were great, i'd like to have the best snes games available without having to re-buy a snes.
that's those damn dirty conartists at
> Nintendo repackaging their old games.
What? if you don't wan't the game, they aren't about to make you buy it. As with so many old games, they're still enjoyed by loads of people, so why shouldn't it be possible for them to buy it on a seperate format? If the demand is there, people will buy it. SNES mario games were great, i'd like to have the best snes games available without having to re-buy a snes.
Resvilfan wrote:
> I know it's Nintendo but its the same with rareware, They have to go through
> Nintendo to publish and it usually ends up a similar price.
Yeah but at least Rare are making original games instead of crappy rehashes.
> I know it's Nintendo but its the same with rareware, They have to go through
> Nintendo to publish and it usually ends up a similar price.
Yeah but at least Rare are making original games instead of crappy rehashes.
To be honest, this wasn`t meant to lead to a discussion. As I stated, many will disagree with what I said, presuming that a single counter example will falsify my argument. I didn`t say that ALL people fell into the categories I stated, so I really don`t care what the replies are.
The point is, stats in magazines are impossible to believe usually. The amount of manipulation of data, and holding back of other vital information plays such a huge role that none of them can be believed - including the one bu CVG.
Also, Wolfhound, do you have a URL for that IGN survey. I`d love to take a look and see where the most likely places were that the data was manipulated.
The point is, stats in magazines are impossible to believe usually. The amount of manipulation of data, and holding back of other vital information plays such a huge role that none of them can be believed - including the one bu CVG.
Also, Wolfhound, do you have a URL for that IGN survey. I`d love to take a look and see where the most likely places were that the data was manipulated.
pb wrote:
> It must really worry you, eh?! Do you get any sleep after reading things like
...
> or you as an individual, so relax.
PB, I dont know what you think your doing...
But its not big, or clever...
This is a console rivalry debate going on here...
There is neither any need, or any desire for level headed well rounded arguments here...
> It must really worry you, eh?! Do you get any sleep after reading things like
...
> or you as an individual, so relax.
PB, I dont know what you think your doing...
But its not big, or clever...
This is a console rivalry debate going on here...
There is neither any need, or any desire for level headed well rounded arguments here...
I know it's Nintendo but its the same with rareware, They have to go through Nintendo to publish and it usually ends up a similar price.
You gotta hand it to Sony though, the platinum range and budget allowed you to get top games at a bargain and A PS2 budget range is in the works starting at £15.
You gotta hand it to Sony though, the platinum range and budget allowed you to get top games at a bargain and A PS2 budget range is in the works starting at £15.
Resvilfan wrote:
> Tiltawhirl> I was just talking in general how Nintendo sell cheap hardware
> then continue to sell games at ridiculous prices, i was referring to super mario
> bros 2 (just as an example)
That was a Nintendo game, not Rare.
I don't agree with the prices of GBA games I think they extract the urine, who the heck would rather buy some cack old SNES game when they could get a PS2, then buy GTA3 for the same price.
> Tiltawhirl> I was just talking in general how Nintendo sell cheap hardware
> then continue to sell games at ridiculous prices, i was referring to super mario
> bros 2 (just as an example)
That was a Nintendo game, not Rare.
I don't agree with the prices of GBA games I think they extract the urine, who the heck would rather buy some cack old SNES game when they could get a PS2, then buy GTA3 for the same price.
Ant wrote:
Super Mario Advance, for one. Can't believe I
> bought that, what a rip-off.
That's not a Rare game, that's those damn dirty conartists at Nintendo repackaging their old games.
It's nothing to do with Rare, I also don't agree with them releasing so many rehashed SNES games I think it sucks.
Super Mario Advance, for one. Can't believe I
> bought that, what a rip-off.
That's not a Rare game, that's those damn dirty conartists at Nintendo repackaging their old games.
It's nothing to do with Rare, I also don't agree with them releasing so many rehashed SNES games I think it sucks.
Tiltawhirl> I was just talking in general how Nintendo sell cheap hardware then continue to sell games at ridiculous prices, i was referring to super mario bros 2 (just as an example)
and the only possible way to judge which are the best games is to set up a web site like imdb.com which everyone can vote, cus in the end it's the people's opinion that counts.
and the only possible way to judge which are the best games is to set up a web site like imdb.com which everyone can vote, cus in the end it's the people's opinion that counts.
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> Resvilfan wrote:
haha £35 for a updated nes game doesn't
> sound
> like caring to me.
>When did Rare release an updated SNES game?
Super Mario Advance, for one. Can't believe I bought that, what a rip-off.
> Resvilfan wrote:
haha £35 for a updated nes game doesn't
> sound
> like caring to me.
>When did Rare release an updated SNES game?
Super Mario Advance, for one. Can't believe I bought that, what a rip-off.
Just get all the damned consoles in the world!
"No money"
Steal..
"No money"
Steal..
Page: