The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
When Baldurs Gate was out on the PC, it was an RPG.
Now it's out on the PS2, it's an action/adventure.
Why?
Does Sony not think that it's "cool" to have an RPG on their console? I know that the PS2 is a trendy console, and how we should (allegedly) all praise Sony for bringing gaming to the masses, but does something change when it's out on the PS2?
Another example is the graphics from Jak & Daxter. This quote is taken from the preview of Jak & Daxter in OPSM2, talking about the ingame graphics:
"The overall look sits surprisingly comfortably between Disneyesque rosy cheeks, and the sexier, streamlined aesthetic of Japanese anime. In this way the game meets traditional expectations of how a platformer should be drawn but undercuts all that wholesomeness with a dash of disquietude."
Basically, for those that haven't seen any screen shots, it looks cartoony. It's a fun cartoony platformy type game, and the graphics reflect this, bright colours etc. This certainly isn't Resident Evil or Silent Hill, that's for sure.
So why doesn't the preview say this?
Has Sony banned them from saying a game looks cartoony so that the PS2 keeps its "adult image"?
Is that also why I have seen more adverts for FIFA than I have Pro Evo Soccer? Because FIFA has the name, the image, and Sony want to capitalise on this, especailly as we are coming up to Christmas?
At the end of the day, I suppose that Sony just want to sell consoles, and they don't seem too bothered how they go about this.
Don't get me wrong, I like my PS2, I have some great games and am glad I bought it, but it does seem that Sony are "bending" some facts, so that the machine seems more attractive to the target audience.
Which is why J&D is an "engrossing and challenging platformer with non-cartoony graphics, er honest guv. Even though it looks cartoony, it's, er, not. Really."
And the biggest RPG on the PC isn't, in fact, and RPG. But something that sounds like a lot like the popular Tomb Raider series: an Action/Adventure game.
Nice.
Now it's out on the PS2, it's an action/adventure.
Why?
Does Sony not think that it's "cool" to have an RPG on their console? I know that the PS2 is a trendy console, and how we should (allegedly) all praise Sony for bringing gaming to the masses, but does something change when it's out on the PS2?
Another example is the graphics from Jak & Daxter. This quote is taken from the preview of Jak & Daxter in OPSM2, talking about the ingame graphics:
"The overall look sits surprisingly comfortably between Disneyesque rosy cheeks, and the sexier, streamlined aesthetic of Japanese anime. In this way the game meets traditional expectations of how a platformer should be drawn but undercuts all that wholesomeness with a dash of disquietude."
Basically, for those that haven't seen any screen shots, it looks cartoony. It's a fun cartoony platformy type game, and the graphics reflect this, bright colours etc. This certainly isn't Resident Evil or Silent Hill, that's for sure.
So why doesn't the preview say this?
Has Sony banned them from saying a game looks cartoony so that the PS2 keeps its "adult image"?
Is that also why I have seen more adverts for FIFA than I have Pro Evo Soccer? Because FIFA has the name, the image, and Sony want to capitalise on this, especailly as we are coming up to Christmas?
At the end of the day, I suppose that Sony just want to sell consoles, and they don't seem too bothered how they go about this.
Don't get me wrong, I like my PS2, I have some great games and am glad I bought it, but it does seem that Sony are "bending" some facts, so that the machine seems more attractive to the target audience.
Which is why J&D is an "engrossing and challenging platformer with non-cartoony graphics, er honest guv. Even though it looks cartoony, it's, er, not. Really."
And the biggest RPG on the PC isn't, in fact, and RPG. But something that sounds like a lot like the popular Tomb Raider series: an Action/Adventure game.
Nice.
Page:
Your Honour wrote:
> When Baldurs Gate was out on the PC, it was an RPG.
Now it's out on the PS2,
> it's an action/adventure.
> Why?
Now... I dont know... and I have no real understanding of what Baulders Gate is going to be like on the PS2 (However, since thats never stopped 'The Mail')
Maybe the PS2 Baulders Gate is a cut-down version of the PC Baulders Gate?
I read a post about a console gamer whos friend felt overwhelemed by Baulder Gate on the PC, so maybe they have made the gameplay more approachable by a wider audience for the console market...
Rather like Origin did for the Ultima series when they released Ultima Games on the SNES and Gameboy?
> When Baldurs Gate was out on the PC, it was an RPG.
Now it's out on the PS2,
> it's an action/adventure.
> Why?
Now... I dont know... and I have no real understanding of what Baulders Gate is going to be like on the PS2 (However, since thats never stopped 'The Mail')
Maybe the PS2 Baulders Gate is a cut-down version of the PC Baulders Gate?
I read a post about a console gamer whos friend felt overwhelemed by Baulder Gate on the PC, so maybe they have made the gameplay more approachable by a wider audience for the console market...
Rather like Origin did for the Ultima series when they released Ultima Games on the SNES and Gameboy?
Sony are relying on their vast coverage of all the gaming population through the PSOne to justify the purchase of the PS2. While I disagree with this in principle, why should Sony have to play the morally correct way when Nintendo and Microsoft are using their sheer reputation to sell their console.
The PSOne catered for all tastes in the games made for it. It was the console that brought gaming to the masses, and everyone appreciates that. This was all done while yopu had Nintendo and Sega being happy just selling to a small, abeit captive market. Sony broke the monopoly, and Microsoft are trying to do the same. This seems to be following the same trend that the PSOne followed:
1.Two companies have monopoly over gaming market
2.New company enters fray with high quality console, with games aimed at wide spectrum
3.Public take to new console, and buy new console and games, which are reasonably priced.
4.One of the old companies faces hardship.
The XBox may not comply to the latter of point 3, but the XBox has had £500 million spent on publicity alone, and so the positive saturation in the press of the XBox hype means two things:
1.People will buy it.
2.Some will be disappointed because it cant live up to all the hype it was given.
The games will have to be highly priced, as the XBox loses money on every sale, so that the price will not be dropped until the main component, the GeForce3 graphics card falls, which won't be any time soon. The games will have to be highly priced, as well as popular, to make back the loss on the console. The console won't be able to live up to all the hype, as there are so many games, from so many publishers, given so much publicity, reviewers will pick games apart when the novelty of playing it wears off. It will take only a couple of cash-ins like FIFA or generic games for people to become disgruntled. The XBox games are trying to mimic the origianl PSOnes in that there was many of them, and they did not aim for one specific user group.
The GC has not had as much publicity as any of the other consoles, and the release date is not even certain yet. There are some excellent title coming out for it, like Pikmin, however the primary praise given for it consists of "Look at wave race, the water looks very real". The customised DVD size means that it will take very long, if at all to be chipped. This was the PS2's strong point. There were cheap, albeit illegal games available for next to nothing. The smaller size also means that it might not be capable of any DVD movie playback. The price however will be the main selling point. Nintendo have been known to aim their games at children, with a lot of Mario cash ins in the past, and cute games being common. It is tipped to have many more childrens games for this console, even if it does now have the Resident Evil series.
Then theres the PS2. The PS2 is out now, meaning that people can buy it now, and there are already great titles like GT3 and GTA3. It is priced cheaply and has DVD playback. There is plenty of time between now and the release of its rivals, and it already has a 20 million user base worldwide. It has a monopoly over Christmas, and MGS2 is also on the horizon. The technology exists to play imported games, and the games made aims themselves at all groups, from children to adults, and cater for all tastes. The games now are tending to aim themselves at the mid-late teens, with more action-adventure and survival horror games.
I think the PS2 will be the most successful, due to its prior user base, price, great games and widespread popularity, even if the XBox will be a novelty at first due to its graphics, and the overhyped Halo.
The GC will sell steadily, even if it does not become popular with the masses, and all I hope is that Nintendo don't exclude many third party developers, as it is apparent from the success of the PSOne, PS2 and XBox (In USA) that having third party games is vital. Nintendo maintains a good quality of games, but the other consoles may have many poor games, but the number and quality of some of the others justifies it.
Where would we be without games like GT3, Soul Reaver etc.
I think having some really bad games like Army Men and Vib Ribbon is fine as long as there are some great games that stand out.
The PSOne catered for all tastes in the games made for it. It was the console that brought gaming to the masses, and everyone appreciates that. This was all done while yopu had Nintendo and Sega being happy just selling to a small, abeit captive market. Sony broke the monopoly, and Microsoft are trying to do the same. This seems to be following the same trend that the PSOne followed:
1.Two companies have monopoly over gaming market
2.New company enters fray with high quality console, with games aimed at wide spectrum
3.Public take to new console, and buy new console and games, which are reasonably priced.
4.One of the old companies faces hardship.
The XBox may not comply to the latter of point 3, but the XBox has had £500 million spent on publicity alone, and so the positive saturation in the press of the XBox hype means two things:
1.People will buy it.
2.Some will be disappointed because it cant live up to all the hype it was given.
The games will have to be highly priced, as the XBox loses money on every sale, so that the price will not be dropped until the main component, the GeForce3 graphics card falls, which won't be any time soon. The games will have to be highly priced, as well as popular, to make back the loss on the console. The console won't be able to live up to all the hype, as there are so many games, from so many publishers, given so much publicity, reviewers will pick games apart when the novelty of playing it wears off. It will take only a couple of cash-ins like FIFA or generic games for people to become disgruntled. The XBox games are trying to mimic the origianl PSOnes in that there was many of them, and they did not aim for one specific user group.
The GC has not had as much publicity as any of the other consoles, and the release date is not even certain yet. There are some excellent title coming out for it, like Pikmin, however the primary praise given for it consists of "Look at wave race, the water looks very real". The customised DVD size means that it will take very long, if at all to be chipped. This was the PS2's strong point. There were cheap, albeit illegal games available for next to nothing. The smaller size also means that it might not be capable of any DVD movie playback. The price however will be the main selling point. Nintendo have been known to aim their games at children, with a lot of Mario cash ins in the past, and cute games being common. It is tipped to have many more childrens games for this console, even if it does now have the Resident Evil series.
Then theres the PS2. The PS2 is out now, meaning that people can buy it now, and there are already great titles like GT3 and GTA3. It is priced cheaply and has DVD playback. There is plenty of time between now and the release of its rivals, and it already has a 20 million user base worldwide. It has a monopoly over Christmas, and MGS2 is also on the horizon. The technology exists to play imported games, and the games made aims themselves at all groups, from children to adults, and cater for all tastes. The games now are tending to aim themselves at the mid-late teens, with more action-adventure and survival horror games.
I think the PS2 will be the most successful, due to its prior user base, price, great games and widespread popularity, even if the XBox will be a novelty at first due to its graphics, and the overhyped Halo.
The GC will sell steadily, even if it does not become popular with the masses, and all I hope is that Nintendo don't exclude many third party developers, as it is apparent from the success of the PSOne, PS2 and XBox (In USA) that having third party games is vital. Nintendo maintains a good quality of games, but the other consoles may have many poor games, but the number and quality of some of the others justifies it.
Where would we be without games like GT3, Soul Reaver etc.
I think having some really bad games like Army Men and Vib Ribbon is fine as long as there are some great games that stand out.
Sony are scared of showing that the most popular games (and consoles...) are not always the best. It is scared to show gamers that cartoony ('kiddie') games can be good, as this would play to Nintendos favour. Basically, it does want to sell consoles however possible. This is one reason why I prefer Nintendo. It wants to make good games, and believes through this will sell consoles. Maybe it's kind of a niave view of the world, but still...
When Baldurs Gate was out on the PC, it was an RPG.
Now it's out on the PS2, it's an action/adventure.
Why?
Does Sony not think that it's "cool" to have an RPG on their console? I know that the PS2 is a trendy console, and how we should (allegedly) all praise Sony for bringing gaming to the masses, but does something change when it's out on the PS2?
Another example is the graphics from Jak & Daxter. This quote is taken from the preview of Jak & Daxter in OPSM2, talking about the ingame graphics:
"The overall look sits surprisingly comfortably between Disneyesque rosy cheeks, and the sexier, streamlined aesthetic of Japanese anime. In this way the game meets traditional expectations of how a platformer should be drawn but undercuts all that wholesomeness with a dash of disquietude."
Basically, for those that haven't seen any screen shots, it looks cartoony. It's a fun cartoony platformy type game, and the graphics reflect this, bright colours etc. This certainly isn't Resident Evil or Silent Hill, that's for sure.
So why doesn't the preview say this?
Has Sony banned them from saying a game looks cartoony so that the PS2 keeps its "adult image"?
Is that also why I have seen more adverts for FIFA than I have Pro Evo Soccer? Because FIFA has the name, the image, and Sony want to capitalise on this, especailly as we are coming up to Christmas?
At the end of the day, I suppose that Sony just want to sell consoles, and they don't seem too bothered how they go about this.
Don't get me wrong, I like my PS2, I have some great games and am glad I bought it, but it does seem that Sony are "bending" some facts, so that the machine seems more attractive to the target audience.
Which is why J&D is an "engrossing and challenging platformer with non-cartoony graphics, er honest guv. Even though it looks cartoony, it's, er, not. Really."
And the biggest RPG on the PC isn't, in fact, and RPG. But something that sounds like a lot like the popular Tomb Raider series: an Action/Adventure game.
Nice.
Now it's out on the PS2, it's an action/adventure.
Why?
Does Sony not think that it's "cool" to have an RPG on their console? I know that the PS2 is a trendy console, and how we should (allegedly) all praise Sony for bringing gaming to the masses, but does something change when it's out on the PS2?
Another example is the graphics from Jak & Daxter. This quote is taken from the preview of Jak & Daxter in OPSM2, talking about the ingame graphics:
"The overall look sits surprisingly comfortably between Disneyesque rosy cheeks, and the sexier, streamlined aesthetic of Japanese anime. In this way the game meets traditional expectations of how a platformer should be drawn but undercuts all that wholesomeness with a dash of disquietude."
Basically, for those that haven't seen any screen shots, it looks cartoony. It's a fun cartoony platformy type game, and the graphics reflect this, bright colours etc. This certainly isn't Resident Evil or Silent Hill, that's for sure.
So why doesn't the preview say this?
Has Sony banned them from saying a game looks cartoony so that the PS2 keeps its "adult image"?
Is that also why I have seen more adverts for FIFA than I have Pro Evo Soccer? Because FIFA has the name, the image, and Sony want to capitalise on this, especailly as we are coming up to Christmas?
At the end of the day, I suppose that Sony just want to sell consoles, and they don't seem too bothered how they go about this.
Don't get me wrong, I like my PS2, I have some great games and am glad I bought it, but it does seem that Sony are "bending" some facts, so that the machine seems more attractive to the target audience.
Which is why J&D is an "engrossing and challenging platformer with non-cartoony graphics, er honest guv. Even though it looks cartoony, it's, er, not. Really."
And the biggest RPG on the PC isn't, in fact, and RPG. But something that sounds like a lot like the popular Tomb Raider series: an Action/Adventure game.
Nice.
Page: